A repeated measures study of changes in health‐related quality of life during pregnancy and the relationship with obstetric factors

Chang, Shiow Ru; Chen, Kuang-Ho; Lin, Ming-I; Lin, Ho‐Hsiung; Huang, Lian‐Hua; Lin, Wei-An

doi:10.1111/jan.12374

Cited by 49 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…were effective on quality of life. It was determined that risk factors in obstetric history have had an negative impact on the quality of life [17]. In this regard, the data in our study supports the study of Chang et al [17].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…[12], it was found that physical role and social function subscale scores were higher than other subscale scores. Chang et al [17] reported mental health average score as highest in pregnancy, Sonmezer et al [18] and Kartal and Sayiner [19] reported general health average score as highest in pregnancy. Research data show that pregnant women feel better about themselves, especially in terms of physical function, general and mental health, and are satisfied with these aspects of their lives.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For some women, pregnancy is a very important and happy event, but it may be a source of sadness for some. For this reason, it is necessary to determine the risk factors that affect women's reactions to pregnancy and compliance [4,13,17,18]. [12], it was found that physical role and social function subscale scores were higher than other subscale scores.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Pires et al [22] reported that risky pregnancies may lead to anxiety and decrease quality of life. In Chang et al's study [17] in which they studied the changes in quality of life of 358 Taiwanese women during pregnancy and their relation to obstetric factors, it was found that multiparity, previous infertility, the use of assisted reproductive techniques, etc. were effective on quality of life.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For a healthy pregnancy and a healthy mother-infant, it is important that the family is able to adapt to the changes that occur in their lives with pregnancy [13,17]. For some women, pregnancy is a very important and happy event, but it may be a source of sadness for some.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Determination of Quality of Life and Affecting Factors in Pregnant Women

Erbaş

Demä°Rel

2017

IJND

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Background: The physiological and psychosocial changes in pregnant women can affect the quality of life. Increasing the quality of life of mother and infant in pregnancy is important to prevent some risks from occurring Objective:The research was conducted to measure the quality of life in pregnant women and examine the factors related to quality of life. Method:The sample of this study consisted of 392 pregnant women who had no communication problems and who were at 10 weeks and more of gestation and who came to Sivas State Hospital Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinic between April 15-May 24, 2013. The data was collected using the questionnaire form (31 questions) and the SF-36 quality of life scale. Average, standard deviation, percentage, independent two sample t-test, Anova tests were used in the evaluation of data (SPSS 14 package program) and statistical significance was examined at 0.05 significance level. Results:Average scores of the quality of life subscale are 54.20 for physical function, 42.85 for physical role, 35.53 for pain, 47.44 for social function, 53.27 for general health, 48.63 for emotional role, 54.29 for mental health and 54.68 for vitalness. In terms of pain subscale scores, the difference between the risky and non risky pregnants was statistically significant (p<0.05). The difference between the physical role, pain and emotional role subscale scores of the pregnancies with and without the risk of the current pregnancy was statistically significant (p <0.05). The average subscale scores for the current and the unaffected pregnancies are 33.50-48.65 for the physical role, 38.20-33.88 for the pain, and 42-52.75 for the emotional role. The average pain score was found to be 39.48 at pregnant women who were at risk in obstetric area and 34.23 at pregnant women who were not at risk. Conclusion:According to the results of the research, the best health indicator from the quality of life subscales is the vitalness, while the worst health indicator is pain. The quality of life of pregnant women who have risks in the current pregnancy is affected negatively.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Determination of Quality of Life and Affecting Factors in Pregnant Women

Erbaş

Demä°Rel

2017

IJND

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Disability and functioning of women with low‐risk pregnancy: Assessment using the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0)

Dantas

Correia

et al. 2019

Intl J Gynecology & Obste

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To evaluate the disability and functioning of women with low‐risk pregnancy in the second and third gestational trimesters. Methods A longitudinal observational study was conducted from June 5, 2015, to April 30, 2016, in Family Health Units in the city of Santa Cruz, Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil, involving women who were in the second trimester of pregnancy where the pregnancy had been classified as low‐risk. A form was designed specifically for the study to collect sociodemographic, urogynecological, and obstetric data. Functioning and disability were assessed using WHODAS 2.0, and descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed. Results Higher levels of disability were observed in cognition in the second trimester (P=0.021), while mobility and life activities domains had higher scores (higher score meaning the woman was more adversely affected) in the third trimester (P=0.007 and P=0.029). Urinary incontinence in the second trimester affected functioning in participation (P=0.023). Pain affected life activities (P=0.023) in the second trimester and participation in the third trimester (P=0.044); and general functioning (P=0.050 and P=0.025), mobility (P=0.002 and P=0.001), and self‐care (P=0.0446 and P=0.023) in the second and third trimesters, respectively. Conclusion The findings showed that, even in a low‐risk pregnancy, functioning can be affected in different domains. The identification of impairments to functioning could enable improvement in care. Longitudinal studies involving the first trimester and postpartum are necessary to gain insight into women's disability and functioning during the pregnancy–puerperal period.

show abstract