Telephone Intervention and Quality of Life in Patients With Breast Cancer

Abstract

The aim of this quasi-experimental study was to examine the effectiveness of a telephone support intervention 1 week after surgery on the quality of life (QOL) of patients with breast cancer. The sample consisted of 228 patients with breast cancer allocated to an intervention group (n = 120) and control group (n = 108). The data were collected using Ferrans and Powers Quality of Life Index-Cancer Version (QLI-CV) and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Breast Cancer Module (EORTC QLQ-BR23). The self-reported QOL of patients with breast cancer was considered moderately high. Statistically significant associations were found between QOL and the demographic characteristics of age, education, and employment status and of having underage children. Statistically significant associations were found between QOL and clinical characteristics such as type of surgery and axilla treatment. The strongest predictors of poor QOL were age, control group, and type of surgery. Age was the strongest predictor of poor QOL in global QLI and in the health and functioning, socioeconomic, and family subscales. The patients' experiences show that the telephone intervention was helpful and the timing was appropriate. The QOL in patients with breast cancer was better in subscales of body image, future perspective, and postoperative side effects. The intervention group showed significantly better body image; they worried less about the future and had less postoperative side effects than the control group did. These results may help in discussing QOL issues and should be considered when planning and implementing interventions for patients with breast cancer.

Association between Socioeconomic Status and Altered Appearance Distress, Body Image, and Quality of Life Among Breast Cancer Patients

“…Consistent with numerous previous findings in our study, quality of life increased for patients who were married and for patients with more education than patients who were not married or patients with less education (Janz et al, 2005;Ahn et al, 2009;Ashing-Giwa and Lim, 2009;Salonen et al, 2009). Breast cancer patients who were married had more physical and psychosocial support than patients who were single, divorced, or separated because their husbands or partners helped them cope with changes and negative emotions (Ahn et al, 2009;Ashing-Giwa and Lim, 2009;Salonen et al, 2009).…”

“…Breast cancer patients who were married had more physical and psychosocial support than patients who were single, divorced, or separated because their husbands or partners helped them cope with changes and negative emotions (Ahn et al, 2009;Ashing-Giwa and Lim, 2009;Salonen et al, 2009). One study found that physicians spend more time with affluent and educated patients than with financially and educationally deprived patients who actually need more attention and care (Ashing-Giwa and Lim, 2009).…”

Quality of life of healthy subjects and patients with arthritis and diabetes mellitus in Bayelsa State, Niger Delta region

“…The progressive decline in recorded QOL scores from apparently healthy subjects to patients with diabetes mellitus which became worst with arthritis co-existing with other chronic illnesses observed further strengthens the validity, reliability and sensitivity of the Ferrans and Powers quality of life index scale as widely reported [11,[19][20][21][22][23] and its applicability in Nigerian settings. However, translation to local dialect and its re-validation may be desirable in some situations.…”

“…The tool used for the study was the Ferrans and Powers quality of life index (QLI) questionnaire which has been widely validated to be very reliable [11,[19][20][21][22][23]. In addition information on demographic characteristics was collected from the patients using a standard format as well.…”

La intervención psicológica en pacientes oncológicos: una revisión de la literatura (2000-2014)

“…Esto ha supuesto la pérdida de información así como dificultades a la hora de generalizar los resultados a la población. Además, se han encontrado trabajos que no cuentan con grupo control (11,23) , ausencia de un procedimiento de aleatorización adecuado (77) , ausencia de control de las variables (50,61,(78)(79)(80) ; falta de equivalencia entre el grupo control y el grupo experimental en características clínicas, sociodemográficas, entre otras, dificultad para la clarificación de las condiciones que hacen más o menos efectiva una intervención (50,(81)(82)(83) , uso de muestras demasiado homogéneas (77,84) con la consiguiente dificultad de generalización, ausencia de seguimientos a largo plazo (83) , problemas con los instrumentos de medida utilizados y los análisis estadís-ticos (82,85) y el uso de estudios retrospectivos (86) . Todo ello, en muchos casos, obliga a tomar con cautela los resultados obtenidos, dificulta la comparación objetiva de los datos proporcionados por los distintos estudios, la obtención de conclusiones vá-lidas y, por lo tanto, la generalización de los resultados con las garantías metodoló-gicas necesarias.…”