4.4 Article

Health-related quality of life in children and emotional reactions of parents following completion of cancer treatment

期刊

PEDIATRIC BLOOD & CANCER
卷 47, 期 3, 页码 312-319

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pbc.20661

关键词

neoplasm in childhood; psychological adaptation; quality of life

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background. Completing therapy is one of the major transitions in care in the practice of pediatric oncology and, therefore, deserves special consideration. The purpose of the study was to investigate health-related quality of life. (HRQOL) of pediatric patients, and emotional reactions of their parents, shortly after the end of successful treatment. Methods. HRQOL of 126 patients, aged 1-15 years, on average 2 months after the end of successful treatment, was assessed with the TNO-AZL Pre-school Quality of life Questionnaire and the TNO-AZL Children's Quality of life Questionnaire. Emotional adjustment of 124 mothers and 111 fathers was assessed with the General Health Questionnaire and the Situation Specific Emotional Reaction Questionnaire. The outcomes of the patients and parents were compared with norm data by means of one sample t-tests, one sample sign-tests or binomial tests. Results. All age groups, except patients aged 8-11 years, experienced worse HRQOL than the norm with respect to motor functioning. In addition, pre-school patients were rated worse on sleeping, appetite, stomach, skin, problem behavior, anxiety, and liveliness, and patients aged 6-7 years on autonomy and cognitive functioning. Parents reported more psychological distress than the norm. Compared to parents whose children were 1-5 years after cancer treatment, they suffered more from feelings of loneliness, helplessness, and uncertainty. Conclusions. A few months after the end of successful cancer treatment, both patients and parents appeared to experience worse well-being than the norm to a clinically relevant extent. Supporting patients and parents should not stop when treatment ends.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据