Changes in quality of life in patients with advanced cancer

Sharpe, Louise; Butow, Phyllis; Smith, Clair; McConnell, David; Clarke, Stephen

doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.02.017

Cited by 61 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(40 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Half of the included studies were conducted among patients with cancer [15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22, 24, 28, 34, 35, 41, 44, 47, 50–52, 55, 56], whereas the other studies included patients with a range of other somatic illnesses (see Table 3). In three studies, the patient sample consisted of a combination of both patients with cancer and patients with another somatic illness [38, 39, 45].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In most studies, a face-to-face interview was conducted to elicit patients’ QoL domains [7, 8, 15–19, 21–24, 26, 28, 29, 31–37, 39, 41, 42, 44, 45, 48, 50, 51, 55, 56]. In the remaining studies, QoL domains were identified by means of a telephone interview [53], focus groups [47], or a questionnaire employing open-ended questions [43, 46, 52].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third, in the majority of the reviewed studies using the SEIQoL ( N = 18) [15–19, 22–24, 26, 28, 29, 31, 32, 36, 38, 39, 41, 42] and in one study using study-specific questions [55] patients also completed other (QoL) questionnaires, which might have affected the choice of self-nominated domains. Unfortunately, most studies did not provide information about the order in which the various questionnaires were administered.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(range 39–82)Consecutive sample of SCLC patients, beginning their first-line chemotherapy, were recruited from five outpatient clinics for chest diseases in The Netherlands.SEIQoL-DWFace-to-face interviews. All but two interviews were administered at the patient’s homeParticipants additionally administered the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) and it’s lung cancer module (QLQ-CL13)T1Nomination of five areas of life that the individual considers to be important for his/her overall QoLInformation on the analysis of the interviews to investigate the administration process.Illustration of findings with individual interview extractsDomains considered to be important for patient’s overall QoL (in descending frequency of patients nominating the cue): Family (my husband; mywife; my children,becoming a granny,grandchildren; contactwith my grandchildren;support from my family;to sort things out withmy wife; ability to enjoymy family and otherrelations) Health (fatigue; health;to be cured; feelingphysically and mentallywell; being able to dowhat I want to do;becoming healthier;feeling good; not to gettoo ill; being mobile;getting back to myformer daily routine) Social life (socialcontacts; social life;contacts in my livingenvironment; friends;relations; support frommy colleagues; club life;family not directlyrelated) Leisure (leisure activities;sports; football; playingcards and fishing;sewing; my garden;working as a volunteer atthe cemetery) Enjoying life (having aholiday; to enjoy life;time all to yourself;freedom and happiness;going out everywhere) Living conditions (livingconditions; home, gardenand pets; housingconditions; a quiet andpeaceful well-organizedlife; norms and values insociety) Autonomy (beingindependent; my car, myfreedom; beingphysically and mentallyindependent; doingsomething on my own;continuing my formerindependent life) Work (own shop; movingfirm; business; work;working in alternativemedicine; my work asbaby-sit) Finance (keeping controlof my finances; my wife’sbudget after my death; notbeing restricted in budgetto enjoy life) Attitudes toward life(positive thinking; puttingeverything intoperspective)Sharpe et al [19]AustraliaTo investigate the relationship between response shift and adjustment N = 56 patients with metastatic cancerMean age 64 years (range 46–82)Consecutive patients who had been diagnosed with metastatic cancer within the last 3 months and being treated with palliative intent were recruited from three Medical Oncology Departments in Sydney, AustraliaSEIQoL-DWFace-to-face interview administered at the patient’s homeParticipants additionally administered the Functional assessment for Cancer Therapy (FACT-G)T1–T3Nomination of five most important domains that a subject indentifies as contributing to his/her QoLNo information on the analysis conducted to derive the presented QoL domainsNo illustration of findings with individual patients’ profilesDomains mentioned as the most important contributor to QoL at T1 (in descending frequency of patients nominating the cue): Health Family…”

Section: Appendixmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Somatically ill persons’ self-nominated quality of life domains: review of the literature and guidelines for future studies

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo review which domains somatically ill persons nominate as constituting their QoL. Specific objective is to examine whether the method of enquiry affect these domains.MethodsWe conducted two literature searches in the databases PubMed/Medline, CINAHL and Psychinfo for qualitative studies examining patients’ self-defined QoL domains using (1) SEIQoL and (2) study-specific questions. For each database, two researchers independently assessed the eligibility of the retrieved abstracts and three researchers subsequently classified all QoL domains.ResultsThirty-six eligible papers were identified: 27 studies using the SEIQoL, and nine presenting data derived from study-specific questions. The influence of the method of enquiry on patients’ self-nominated QoL domains appears limited: most domains were presented in both types of studies, albeit with different frequencies.ConclusionsThis review provides a comprehensive overview of somatically ill persons’ self-nominated QoL domains. However, limitations inherent to reviewing qualitative studies (e.g., the varying level of abstraction of patients’ self-defined QoL domains), limitations of the included studies and limitations inherent to the review process, hinder cross-study comparisons. Therefore, we provide guidelines to address shortcomings of qualitative reports amenable to improvement and to stimulate further improvement of conducting and reporting qualitative research aimed at exploring respondents’ self-nominated QoL domains.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Appendixmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Somatically ill persons’ self-nominated quality of life domains: review of the literature and guidelines for future studies

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This can be related to the meaning of religious and spiritual aspects during the coping process and may hint to the interpretation that they are especially important when patients initially adapt to the new situation. Administered in a specific context, repeated measurements with two samples of cancer patients treated with palliative intent reported only small numeric differences in the number of mentions for spiritual aspects between two interviews (Sharpe et al 2005; Echteld et al 2005). Wettergren et al found no mentions of spirituality in their administration of the SEIQoL-DW to patients with haematological malignancies before and one year after stem cell transplantation (Wettergren et al 2008).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveThe situation of patients with multiple myeloma, whose treatment often implies high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation that can be associated with severe symptoms and psychological distress, has gained attention in recent psychooncological research. This study followed an idiographic approach in order to identify the areas of life most relevant for the interviewed myeloma patients’ quality of life (QoL) as well as their current satisfaction with these.Methods64 patients took part in semi-structured interviews according to the SEIQoL-DW Manual (Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life – Direct Weighting). Visual analogue scales (VAS) were used to gain additional information about a general assessment of the present QoL. Qualitative data evaluation preceded quantitative processing. Groups were compared according to the time elapsed since diagnosis regarding specified areas of life, satisfaction with these and their relative weighting. SEIQoL-DW-indices were correlated to the VAS to reflect on an interindividually comparable parameter.ResultsPersonal social relationships were mentioned significantly more often as important for QoL than health-related aspects, and in direct comparison were weighted significantly stronger. Regarding the change of areas relevant for QoL over the time elapsed since diagnosis, there was a significant difference between groups concerning the area of spirituality. Satisfaction differed significantly between groups for the field of leisure.ConclusionThe results for the interviewed patients with multiple myeloma point out the need to take into account the importance of social and individual aspects when reflecting on QoL. Similar findings have been reported for different samples. The relevance of an individualized approach is illustrated by the fact that individually named areas of life were rated comparatively strongly in their importance for the patients’ QoL. An overall assessment for the current QoL by means of VAS is regarded as an adequate supplement to the SEIQoL-Profile and an alternative to the SEIQoL-DW-Index.

show abstract

Current methodological approaches to the study of sleep disturbances and quality of life in adults with cancer: a systematic review

Berger¹,

Sankaranarayanan²,

Watanabe‐Galloway³

2007

Psycho-Oncology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, sleep disturbances and the health-related quality of life (QOL) experienced by adults with cancer, during and after cancer treatment, have received increasing attention in the scientific literature. The purpose of this paper was to systematically review current methodological approaches to the study of sleep disturbances and QOL in adults with cancer. Databases were searched to identify longitudinal studies of adults with cancer that measured sleep disturbances and QOL in the past 10 years. The review was focused in five primary areas: trends in publication, measurement of sleep and QOL, study design, changes in sleep disturbances and QOL, and the level of this evidence. Of the 40 studies that met the authors' criteria for inclusion, 75% were descriptive in design and 25% were intervention studies. Studies on sleep and QOL among cancer patients have become more common since 2000, include a range of sample sizes and settings, use a variety of measures of sleep and QOL, and examine patients undergoing many types of cancer therapies. No programs of research have been developed in sleep disturbances and QOL in adults with cancer. The 'evidence' that can be drawn from such studies is obviously weak. Current approaches usually describe changes over time, but have not described whether a relationship exists between sleep disturbances and QOL in adults with cancer. Directions for future research are suggested.

show abstract

Changes in quality of life in patients with advanced cancer

Cited by 61 publications

References 29 publications

Somatically ill persons’ self-nominated quality of life domains: review of the literature and guidelines for future studies

Somatically ill persons’ self-nominated quality of life domains: review of the literature and guidelines for future studies

Individual quality of life in patients with multiple myeloma

Current methodological approaches to the study of sleep disturbances and quality of life in adults with cancer: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About