Objective: To characterize scientific publications on the quality of life of people with lung cancer in order to explore current knowledge of the subject, with emphasis on assessment instruments and methodological aspects. Method: A scoping type literature review was performed. Articles were sought in the databases of the Virtual Health Library, in an integrative manner, with the descriptors: Quality of life and Lung Neoplasms, with no date of publication or language restrictions (n=138). The selection of articles was based on inclusion and exclusion criteria defined in the study proposal. Results: We included 18 publications published between 2006 and 2017, the majority (n = 10) of which had a cross-sectional design. Eight different instruments were used to evaluate the quality of life of patients with lung cancer, four of which were specific for people with cancer. There was a prevalence of the use of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Care Quality of Life Questionnaire - EORTC QLQ-C30 (n=8). Prospective studies (n=8) assessed quality of life before and after chemotherapy, physical therapy or pulmonary resection. The studies adopted different methodologies and provided conflicting results of quality of life. Cross-sectional studies with comparatively healthy subjects found an inferior quality of life for people with lung cancer. Conclusion: The scoping review contributed to the identification of the multiple evaluated instruments, both generic and specific. It found a lack of homogeneity in the methodological approaches of the studies. Further prospective studies with a specific instrument and methodological standardization to evaluate the quality of life of people with lung cancer are recommended.

Resumo Este artigo analisa dificuldades enfrentadas por pacientes com câncer de pulmão e familiares em seu itinerário diagnóstico e terapêutico. Trata-se de pesquisa qualitativa, baseada no método de grupo focal, de que participaram pacientes e familiares. Das falas dos participantes, destacam-se duas categorias de análise: “início do percurso e diagnóstico” e “em busca do tratamento: barreiras”. Discute-se a dificuldade de diagnóstico causada por problemas de infraestrutura dos serviços, pela escassez de recursos financeiros dos pacientes, pela inadequação da rede de saúde pública e pelo despreparo profissional. Após o diagnóstico, apresenta-se o percurso em busca do tratamento e as barreiras financeiras, geográficas, estruturais e de processo de trabalho na saúde pública. Resultados mostram que pacientes de pequenos municípios ou da zona rural se deparam com mais dificuldades para acessar os serviços. Conclui-se que o percurso assistencial, no setor público, é prejudicado por desigualdades e vulnerabilidades em saúde que se refletem em dificuldade de acesso e demora no diagnóstico e tratamento da doença.

No abstract