Motolani E Ogunsanya1, Sung Kyung Cho2, Andrew Hudson3, Benjamin F Chong2. 1. College of Pharmacy, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA. 2. Department of Dermatology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Texas Health Presbyterian Hospital Dallas, Dallas, TX, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to characterize the impact of cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) in adults and identify the clinical and non-clinical factors associated with quality of life (QoL), using the Revised Wilson and Cleary Model. METHODS: 101 patients diagnosed with CLE were included in this cross-sectional study. QoL was measured with the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Quality of Life (CLEQoL) scale and disease activity and damage with the Cutaneous Lupus Activity and Severity Index (CLASI). Patient demographics, clinical, and disease characteristics were also collected. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and multiple regression was employed to determine significant (p < 0.05) predictors of overall QoL. Data were analyzed using SPSS v24. RESULTS: The overall regression QoL model was significantly different from zero, (F = 24.96; df = 14, 76; p = <0.001). Disease activity (β = 0.13), pain (β = 0.13), fatigue (β = 0.24), body image (β = 0.62), and side effects (β = -0.13) were significant predictors of overall QoL while controlling for other predictor variables. Patients who experienced higher levels of disease activity, fatigue severity, pain levels, and greater degree of body dissatisfaction had significantly poorer QoL. Fewer side effects experienced from CLE medications were significantly associated with higher QoL. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings support the considerable burden associated with CLE. Several modifiable variables such as pain, fatigue, body image, and disease activity were associated with QoL. Therefore, interventions that incorporate these variables may reduce negative impacts on QoL life and improve health outcomes in CLE patients. Furthermore, given the chronic and recurring nature of the condition, strategies focused on improving QoL are needed for this vulnerable population.
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to characterize the impact of cutaneous lupus erythematosus (CLE) in adults and identify the clinical and non-clinical factors associated with quality of life (QoL), using the Revised Wilson and Cleary Model. METHODS: 101 patients diagnosed with CLE were included in this cross-sectional study. QoL was measured with the Cutaneous Lupus Erythematosus Quality of Life (CLEQoL) scale and disease activity and damage with the Cutaneous Lupus Activity and Severity Index (CLASI). Patient demographics, clinical, and disease characteristics were also collected. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and multiple regression was employed to determine significant (p < 0.05) predictors of overall QoL. Data were analyzed using SPSS v24. RESULTS: The overall regression QoL model was significantly different from zero, (F = 24.96; df = 14, 76; p = <0.001). Disease activity (β = 0.13), pain (β = 0.13), fatigue (β = 0.24), body image (β = 0.62), and side effects (β = -0.13) were significant predictors of overall QoL while controlling for other predictor variables. Patients who experienced higher levels of disease activity, fatigue severity, pain levels, and greater degree of body dissatisfaction had significantly poorer QoL. Fewer side effects experienced from CLE medications were significantly associated with higher QoL. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings support the considerable burden associated with CLE. Several modifiable variables such as pain, fatigue, body image, and disease activity were associated with QoL. Therefore, interventions that incorporate these variables may reduce negative impacts on QoL life and improve health outcomes in CLE patients. Furthermore, given the chronic and recurring nature of the condition, strategies focused on improving QoL are needed for this vulnerable population.
Authors: Kathleen M Nokes; Christopher Lance Coleman; Mary Jane Hamilton; Inge B Corless; Elizabeth Sefcik; Kenn M Kirksey; Lucille Sanzero Eller; Jeanne Kemppainen; Pamela J Dole; Patrice K Nicholas; Nancy R Reynolds; Eli Haugen Bunch; William L Holzemer; Dean J Wantland; Yun-Fang Tsai; Marta Rivero-Mendez; Gladys E Canaval Journal: Appl Nurs Res Date: 2009-07-09 Impact factor: 2.257
Authors: Joerg Albrecht; Lynne Taylor; Jesse A Berlin; Samuel Dulay; Gina Ang; Steven Fakharzadeh; Jonathan Kantor; Ellen Kim; Giuseppe Militello; Karen McGinnis; Stephen Richardson; James Treat; Carmela Vittorio; Abby Van Voorhees; Victoria P Werth Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 8.551
Authors: Nancy E Mayo; Susan C Scott; Mark Bayley; Angela Cheung; Jayne Garland; Jeffrey Jutai; Sharon Wood-Dauphinee Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2013-12-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: April N Naegeli; Emuella Flood; Jennifer Tucker; Jennifer Devlen; Emily Edson-Heredia Journal: Int J Dermatol Date: 2014-12-16 Impact factor: 2.736
Authors: Elizabeth Gaines; Zuleika Bonilla-Martinez; Joerg Albrecht; Lynne Taylor; Joyce Okawa; Andrea B Troxel; Victoria P Werth Journal: Arch Dermatol Date: 2008-08
Authors: Elena Castellano-Rioja; María Del Carmen Giménez-Espert; Ana Soto-Rubio Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-11-20 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Janet E Lubov; Aisha S Jamison; Becky Baltich Nelson; Alice A Amudzi; Kelly N Haas; Jillian M Richmond Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2022-03-31 Impact factor: 5.988
Authors: Cristina Drenkard; Kristina A Theis; Timothy T Daugherty; Charles G Helmick; Charmayne Dunlop-Thomas; Gaobin Bao; Laura Aspey; Tené T Lewis; S Sam Lim Journal: Lupus Sci Med Date: 2022-08