4.0 Article

Evaluation of quality of life, anxiety, and depression in the spouses of patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome

Journal

NIGERIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 22, Issue 4, Pages 516-520

Publisher

WOLTERS KLUWER MEDKNOW PUBLICATIONS
DOI: 10.4103/njcp.njcp_500_18

Keywords

Anxiety; depression; life quality; obstructive sleep apnea syndrome; spouses

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Impaired quality of life can be seen in the spouses of the obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) patients. The main aim of the study is to assess the quality of life, anxiety, and depression in the spouses of the OSAS patients. Materials and Methods: A total of 100 OSAS patients and their spouses were included in the study. The demographic features of patients and the findings related to their disease and relevant clinical conditions were recorded. The quality of life of the spouses was evaluated by Short Form-36, their depression levels by Beck's depression inventory (BDI), anxiety levels by Beck's anxiety inventory, and the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS). Results: About 33% and 26% of patients' spouses showed depression by BDI and HADS, respectively; 14% of them showed anxiety by hospital anxiety scale. Among the subparameters of quality of life in spouses of patients who receive PAP (positive airway pressure) treatment, scores of physical condition, physical role restrictions, and role restrictions due to emotional problems were significantly higher than the ones in spouses of nontreated patients (P < 0.05). Depression scores of spouses of patients who use PAP were significantly lower than the ones who do not use the device (P < 0.05). A significant difference was not found between the two groups by means of anxiety scores (P 0.05). Conclusion: The use of continuous PAP improves not only the quality of life for OSAS patients but also for their spouses and reduces the spouses' depression risk.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available