4.5 Article

Subjective health-related quality of life of Chinese older persons with depression in Shanghai and Hong Kong: relationship to clinical factors, level of functioning and social support

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GERIATRIC PSYCHIATRY
Volume 24, Issue 4, Pages 355-362

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/gps.2129

Keywords

health-related quality of life; clinical factors; level of functioning; social support; chinese; older people with depression

Funding

  1. Research Fund of the Nethersole School of Nursing, the Chinese University of Hong Kong

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim This study aimed to measure and compare the perceptions of HRQoL amongst Chinese older people with depression between Hong Kong and Shanghai and to explore the association of HRQoL with clinical factors, level of functioning and social Support in the two sites. Methods and Results A cross-sectional study was conducted with a convenience sample of 80 older people from Hong Kong and 71 from Shanghai with a diagnosis of depression. The results showed that both the Hong Kong and Shanghai groups had a poor perception of their HRQoL when compared with Caucasian populations. The Shanghai group had a significantly higher HRQoL perception than did the Hong Kong group. Physical health problems that affected functional abilities also influenced older people's satisfaction with life. The severity of depression, number of medical conditions, functional abilities and satisfaction towards social support were predictors of HRQoL. Conclusion The high rate of depression in Hong Kong and Shanghai deserves attention. Older people with depression have both psychological and physical health care needs. This study provides insights for healthcare professionals to plan innovative and co-ordinated services that meet the various health care needs of older people with depression. Copyright (C) 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available