Ocena poradnictwa przedoperacyjnego i jakości życia dokonywana przez chore na raka endometrium

• Authors: Joanna Trawińska , Joanna Skręt-Magierło , Renata Raś , Bogusław Gawlik , Andrzej Skręt , Edyta Barnaś

Title variants

EN

Assessment of preoperative counselling and quality of life of patients with endometrial cancer

• Languages of publication: PL EN

Abstracts

PL

Cel: Głównym celem niniejszej pracy było uzyskanie od pacjentek z rakiem endometrium opinii na temat jakości informacji przekazanych im przed operacją. Dodatkowym celem było skorelowanie tych opinii z czynnikami socjodemograficznymi. Materiał i metody: Prospektywnym badaniem kohortowym objęto 123 chore z rakiem endometrium potwierdzonym w badaniu histopatologicznym, leczone operacyjnie w Klinice Ginekologii i Położnictwa w Rzeszowie w latach 2012–2014. W badaniu zastosowano kwestionariusze EORTC QLQ-C30 i QLQ-INFO25 wypełniane przed wypisem z oddziału. W analizie statystycznej za pomocą analizy korelacji rang oceniono wpływ czynników mających charakter porządkowy. W przypadku czynników o charakterze nominalnym wyliczano wartości średnie i wartości środkowe w porównywanych grupach, a następnie za pomocą testu Kruskala–Wallisa lub testu Manna–Whitneya oceniano różnicę w rozkładzie miar jakości informacji w tych grupach. Wyniki: Z danych uzyskanych od pacjentek, które wypełniły moduł INFO25, wynika, że najwięcej informacji otrzymały one na temat badań (60,3%) i choroby (55%), mniej dowiedziały się o leczeniu (43,4%), a najmniej o jego kontynuacji (28,5%). Chore oceniły najwyżej przydatność informacji (64,5%). Ogólna jakość ich życia wynosiła 55 ± 22. Wykazano niską korelację między oceną informacji a jakością życia. Z lepszą oceną uzyskanych informacji wiązały się młodszy wiek, wyższy poziom wykształcenia i bycie w związku partnerskim. Wnioski: Ocena jakości informacji przekazywanych w okresie przedoperacyjnym jest uzależniona od indywidualnych cech odbiorcy, co należy uwzględnić w procesie informowania. Ponadto należy zwrócić większą uwagę na przekazywanie informacji odnośnie do zasad leczenia i jego kontynuacji.

EN

Purpose: The main aim of the study was to obtain feedback from patients with endometrial cancer on the quality of information provided to them prior to surgery. An additional aim was to correlate these opinions with sociodemographic factors. Material and methods: One hundred and twenty-three patients with endometrial cancer diagnosed by means of tissue sampling, treated surgically at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics in Rzeszów, Poland in 2012–2014 were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. The questionnaires used were: EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-INFO25, completed before discharge from hospital. Statistical analysis assessed the influence of ordinal categorical variables by means of rank correlation analysis. For nominal variables, the mean and median values in the groups compared were calculated, and then the difference in the distribution of the domains of information quality in these groups was estimated using the Kruskal–Wallis test or the Mann–Whitney test. Results: According to data supplied by the patients who filled out INFO-25, they received the largest amount of information about medical tests (60.3%) and the disease itself (55%). They were informed less adequately about treatment (43.4%), and the scarcest information was provided in regard to follow-up (28.5%). The helpfulness of the information received (64.5%) was assessed the highest. Overall quality of their life amounted to 55 ± 22. A low correlation was found between the assessment of information and the quality of life. A younger age, higher level of education and having a partner correlated with a higher score awarded to the information received. Conclusion: The assessment of the quality of the information provided preoperatively depends on the individual characteristics of the recipient, which should be taken into account in the information process. In addition, more attention should be paid to the provision of information concerning the treatment protocol and follow-up.

Keywords

EN

informacja; jakość życia; rak endometrium

Discipline

• MEDICINE: MEDICINE

• Publisher: Medical Communications
• Journal: Current Gynecologic Oncology
• Year: 2017
• Volume: 15
• Issue: 3
• Pages: 172–182

Contributors

author

Joanna Trawińska

• Klinika Ginekologii i Położnictwa, Kliniczny Szpital Wojewódzki nr 1, Uniwersytet Rzeszowski, Rzeszów, Polska

author

Joanna Skręt-Magierło

• Klinika Ginekologii i Położnictwa, Kliniczny Szpital Wojewódzki nr 1, Uniwersytet Rzeszowski, Rzeszów, Polska

author

Renata Raś

• Klinika Ginekologii i Położnictwa, Kliniczny Szpital Wojewódzki nr 1, Uniwersytet Rzeszowski, Rzeszów, Polska

author

Bogusław Gawlik

• Oddział Ginekologii i Położnictwa, Zespół Opieki Zdrowotnej, Dębica, Polska

author

Andrzej Skręt

• Klinika Ginekologii i Położnictwa, Kliniczny Szpital Wojewódzki nr 1, Uniwersytet Rzeszowski, Rzeszów, Polska

author

Edyta Barnaś

• Instytut Położnictwa i Ratownictwa Medycznego, Wydział Medyczny, Uniwersytet Rzeszowski, Rzeszów, Polska

References

• 1. Baekelandt MM, Castiglione M; ESMO Guidelines Working Group: Endometrial carcinoma: ESMO clinical recommendations for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 2009; 20 Suppl 4: 29–31.
• 2. van de Poll-Franse LV, Pijnenborg JMA, Boll D et al.: Health related quality of life and symptoms after pelvic lymphadenectomy or radiotherapy vs. no adjuvant regional treatment in earlystage endometrial carcinoma: a large population-based study. Gynecol Oncol 2012; 127: 153–160.
• 3. Reis N, Beji NK: Risk factors for endometrial cancer in Turkish women: Results from a hospital-based case-control study. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2009; 13: 122–127.
• 4. McCarroll ML, Armbruster S, Frasure HE et al.: Self-efficacy, quality of life, and weight loss in overweight/obese endometrial cancer survivors (SUCCEED): a randomized controlled trial. Gynecol Oncol 2014; 132: 397–402.
• 5. Arem H, Chlebowski R, Stefanick ML et al.: Body mass index, physical activity, and survival after endometrial cancer diagnosis: results from the Women’s Health Initiative. Gynecol Oncol 2013; 128: 181–186.
• 6. Mallinger JB, Griggs JJ, Shields CG: Patient-centered care and breast cancer survivors’ satisfaction with information. Patient Educ Couns 2005; 57: 342–349.
• 7. Mesters I, van den Borne B, De Boer M et al.: Measuring information needs among cancer patients. Patient Educ Couns 2001; 43: 253–262.
• 8. Arraras JI, Kuljanic-Vlasic K, Bjordal K et al.; EORTC Quality of Life Group: EORTC QLQ-INFO26: a questionnaire to assess information given to cancer patients a preliminary analysis in eight countries. Psychooncology 2007; 16: 249–254.
• 9. Meredith C, Symonds P, Webster L et al.: Information needs of cancer patients in west Scotland: cross sectional survey of patients’ views. BMJ 1996; 313: 724–726.
• 10. Jenkins V, Fallowfield L, Saul J: Information needs of patients with cancer: results from a large study in UK cancer centres. Br J Cancer 2001; 84: 48–51.
• 11. Rutten LJ, Arora NK, Bakos AD et al.: Information needs and sources of information among cancer patients: a systematic review of research (1980–2003). Patient Educ Couns 2005; 57: 250–261.
• 12. Lee SY, Hawkins R: Why do patients seek an alternative channel? The effects of unmet needs on patients’ health-related Internet use. J Health Commun 2010; 15: 152–166.
• 13. Papadakos J, Bussière-Côté S, Abdelmutti N et al.: Informational needs of gynecologic cancer survivors. Gynecol Oncol 2012; 124: 452–457.
• 14. Booth K, Beaver K, Kitchener H et al.: Women’s experiences of information, psychological distress and worry after treatment for gynaecological cancer. Patient Educ Couns 2005; 56: 225–232.
• 15. Beaver K, Booth K: Information needs and decision-making preferences: comparing findings for gynaecological, breast and colorectal cancer. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2007; 11: 409–416.
• 16. Bruner DW, Barsevick A, Tian C et al.: Randomized trial results of quality of life comparing whole abdominal irradiation and combination chemotherapy in advanced endometrial carcinoma: a Gynecologic Oncology Group study. Qual Life Res 2007; 16: 89–100.
• 17. Husson O, Mols F, van de Poll-Franse LV: The relation between information provision and health-related quality of life, anxiety and depression among cancer survivors: a systematic review. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 761–772.
• 18. Beekers N, Husson O, Mols F et al.: Symptoms of anxiety and depression are associated with satisfaction with information provision and Internet use among 3080 cancer survivors: results of the PROFILES registry. Cancer Nurs 2015; 38: 335–342.
• 19. Neumann M, Wirtz M, Ernstmann N et al.: Identifying and predicting subgroups of information needs among cancer patients: an initial study using latent class analysis. Support Care Cancer 2011; 19: 1197–1209.
• 20. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B et al.: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993; 85: 365–376.
• 21. Arraras JI, Greimel E, Sezer O et al.: An international validation study of the EORTC QLQ-INFO25 questionnaire: an instrument to assess the information given to cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 2010; 46: 2726–2738.
• 22. Tustin N: The role of patient satisfaction in online health information seeking. J Health Commun 2010; 15: 3–17.
• 23. Lei CP, Har YC, Abdullah KL: Informational needs of breast cancer patients on chemotherapy: differences between patients’ and nurses’ perceptions. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2011; 12: 797–802.
• 24. Castro CM, Wilson C, Wang F et al.: Babel babble: physicians’ use of unclarified medical jargon with patients. Am J Health Behav 2007; 31 Suppl 1: S85–S95.
• 25. Husson O, Denollet J, Oerlemans S et al.: Satisfaction with information provision in cancer patients and the moderating effect of Type D personality. Psychooncology 2013; 22: 2124–2132.
• 26. Nicolaije KAH, Husson O, Ezendam NPM et al.: Endometrial cancer survivors are unsatisfied with received information about diagnosis, treatment and follow-up: a study from the populationbased PROFILES registry. Patient Educ Couns 2012; 88: 427–435.
• 27. Lithner M, Johansson J, Andersson E et al.: Perceived information after surgery for colorectal cancer – an explorative study. Colorectal Dis 2012; 14: 1340–1350.
• 28. Bergenmar M, Johansson H, Sharp L: Patients’ perception of information after completion of adjuvant radiotherapy for breast cancer. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2014; 18: 305–309.
• 29. Angioli R, Plotti F, Capriglione S et al.: The effects of giving patients verbal or written pre-operative information in gynecologic oncology surgery: a randomized study and the medicallegal point of view. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014; 177: 67–71.
• 30. Beaver K, Williamson S, Sutton C et al.: Comparing hospital and telephone follow-up for patients treated for stage-I endometrial cancer (ENDCAT trial): a randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. BJOG 2017; 124: 150–160.
• 31. Pinto AC, Ferreira-Santos F, Lago LD et al.: Information perception, wishes, and satisfaction in ambulatory cancer patients under active treatment: patient-reported outcomes with QLQ-INFO25. Ecancermedicalscience 2014; 8: 425.
• 32. Lamers RE, Cuypers M, Husson O et al.: Patients are dissatisfied with information provision: perceived information provision and quality of life in prostate cancer patients. Psychooncology 2016; 25: 633–640.
• 33. Skręt-Magierło J, Raś R, Barnaś E et al.: Evaluation of the hospital environment for women with endometrial cancer. Ann Agric Environ Med 2016; 23: 511–516.
• 34. Jeppesen MM, Mogensen O, Dehn P et al.: Needs and priorities of women with endometrial and cervical cancer. J Psychosom Obstet Gynaecol 2015; 36: 122–132.
• 35. Reitsma ML, Vandenkerkhof EG, Johnston SL et al.: Does healthrelated quality of life improve in women following gynaecological surgery? J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2011; 33: 1241–1247.
• 36. Hempowicz C, Matthes A, Radosa M et al.: [The influence of medical informed consent discussion on postoperative satisfaction and quality of life of patients with uterine fibroids after myomectomy or hysterectomy]. Psychother Psychosom Med Psychol 2013; 63: 381–386.
• 37. Bowes H, Jones G, Thompson J et al.: Understanding the impact of the treatment pathway upon the health-related quality of life of women with newly diagnosed endometrial cancer – a qualitative study. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2014; 18: 211–217.

• Document Type: article