4.3 Article

Health-related quality of life and fatigue in patients with adrenal incidentaloma

Journal

ENDOCRINE
Volume 40, Issue 1, Pages 84-89

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12020-011-9456-3

Keywords

Adrenal incidentaloma; Quality of life; Subclinical Cushing's syndrome; EQ-5D; SF-36; MFI-20

Funding

  1. Croatian Ministry of Science, Education and Sport [108-0000000-3496]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of the present study was to examine several dimensions of quality of life (QoL) and fatigue in patients with adrenal incidentaloma. This was a case-control study designed to analyze patient outcomes using three validated generic QoL questionnaires, EQ-5D, SF-36, and MFI-20, the results of which were compared to those obtained for age- and sex-matched controls. The study population comprised 139 consecutive patients with nonfunctioning adrenal masses (104 females, 35 males; age 59.1 +/- A 10.8) and 139 age- and sex-matched controls. Reduced QoL was found in patients with adrenal incidentaloma as compared to controls. Dimensions of QoL that were notably affected included mobility (P = 0.03), performance of usual activities (P = 0.002), and anxiety/depression (P = 0.04) as evaluated using the EQ-5D; physical functioning (P < 0.001), physical role (P < 0.001), general health (P < 0.001), vitality (P = 0.001), social functioning (P = 0.001), and emotional role (P < 0.001) as evaluated using the SF-36; and physical fatigue (P = 0.04) as assessed using the MFI-20 questionnaire. In addition, perceived health on a visual analogue scale was also significantly lower in patients than in controls (64.8 +/- A 19.2 vs. 77.1 +/- A 15.1; P < 0.001). Patients with adrenal incidentaloma reported reduced QoL and a higher level of physical fatigue compared to age- and sex-matched controls. This subject will benefit from further studies comparing QoL outcomes of laparoscopic adrenalectomy versus no treatment in patients with adrenal incidentaloma.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available