4.5 Article

Quality of life of sarcoma patients from diagnosis to treatments: Predictors and longitudinal trajectories

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY NURSING
Volume 15, Issue 5, Pages 492-499

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejon.2011.01.001

Keywords

Sarcomas; Quality of life; Diagnosis and treatment; Individual trajectories; Predictors

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Quality of life (QoL) has been increasingly examined in sarcoma patients, but longitudinal research on its variation across different phases of the disease is lacking. The present study aims to analyse change or stability in sarcoma patients' QoL, and to identify the distinct trajectories of change from diagnostic to treatment phase. Demographic and clinical predictors of QoL during treatments are also explored. Method: QoL of 36 Portuguese sarcoma patients was assessed at time of diagnosis (baseline) and again at 3-6 months after the beginning of treatment (T1), using the EORTC QLQ C-30 (Portuguese version). Results: At diagnostic and treatment phases, patients reported a diminished QoL in the majority of QLQ C-30 domains. From baseline to T1, global health/QoL improved significantly, and physical functioning declined. Over time, 38.9% of patients maintained a poor QoL, 27.8% remained in the High QoL cluster, and 22.2% changed towards a worse QoL. Marital status, age, professional status, and radiotherapy predicted QoL scores during treatments. Conclusions: Results suggest that sarcoma patients may experience a diminished QoL, both at diagnosis and during treatments, and reveal a tendency for stability in QoL scores rather than for change. Initial functioning and some demographic and clinical variables have a predictive role for QoL in the treatment phase. Assessment of QoL and multidisciplinary interventions must be a part of routine cancer care, and should be implemented in an initial phase and during treatments. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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