4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Satisfaction With Life Over Time in People With Burn Injury: A National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research Burn Model System Study

Journal

ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION
Volume 101, Issue 1, Pages S63-S70

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.09.119

Keywords

Burns; Quality of life; Rehabilitation; Statistical models

Funding

  1. U.S. Administration for Community Living, Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC [90DP0053]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To examine trajectories of satisfaction with life (SWL) of burn survivors over time and their clinical, demographic, and other predictors. Design: Longitudinal survey. Setting: Not applicable. Participants: Individuals >= 18 years of age who underwent bum-related surgery and met one of the following criteria: (1) >10% total body surface area (TBSA) burn and >= 65 years of age; (2) >20% TBSA burn and 18 to 64 years of age; (3) electrical high voltage/lightning injury; or (4) burn injury to the hands, face, or feet. The participants (N=378) had data on all variables of interest and were included in the analyses. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measure: Satisfaction With Life Scale. Results: Growth mixture modeling identified 2 classes with different trajectories of SWL. The mean SWL of the unchanged class (n=224, 60%) was flat over 2 years with high initial SWL scores. The SWL of the dissatisfied class (n=154, 40%) was at the low end of average and got progressively worse over time. Conclusions: SWL after burn injury can be described by 2 different trajectories with substantially different outcomes. Older age, worse mental health, and unemployment prior to injury predicted membership in the dissatisfied class. Additional services could be provided to those at high risk for low SWL to achieve better outcomes. (C) 2017 by the American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available