scholarly journals Comparison of 3-Month Stroke Disability and Quality of Life across Modified Rankin Scale Categories

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 36-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srikant Rangaraju ◽  
Diogo Haussen ◽  
Raul G. Nogueira ◽  
Fadi Nahab ◽  
Michael Frankel
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Functional Disability ◽  
Modified Rankin Scale ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Good Outcome ◽  
Health Related Qol ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Sparse Methods

Background and Purpose: Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0-2 has been used to define “good outcome” while stroke patients with mRS 3 are grouped with mRS 4-6 as having “poor outcome.” Long-term data comparing quality of life (QoL), particularly across the mRS 2, 3, and 4 subgroups, are sparse. Methods: Participants in the Interventional Management of Stroke 3 (IMS3) trial with documented 3-month mRS, functional disability (Barthel index [BI]), and self-reported EQ5D-3L QoL questionnaires at 3 months after stroke were included. EQ5D-3L summary indices were calculated using published utility weights for the US population. BI and EQ5D-3L indices were compared across mRS categories using multiple pairwise comparisons with appropriate alpha error corrections. Results: Four hundred twenty-three patients were included (mean age 64 ± 13 years, median baseline NIHSS 16 [IQR 12-19], mean BI 84.1 ± 25.3, and mean EQ5D-3L index 0.73 ± 0.24). While significant differences in BI were observed across mRS categories, QoL in the mRS 2 and 3 categories was similar. Based on BI and EQ5D-3L index, mRS 3 status was more similar to mRS 2 than to mRS 4 status, and large heterogeneity in the mRS 3 group was observed. Conclusions: Ischemic stroke patients who achieve mRS 2 and 3 functional outcomes seem to have similar health-related QoL scores. mRS 0-3, rather than 0-2, should be considered a good outcome category in moderate to severe ischemic stroke.

Abstract 188: Differences in Quality of Life Across Modified Rankin Scale Categories in IMS-3

Stroke ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 47 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Srikant Rangaraju ◽  
Raul Nogueira ◽  
Diogo Haussen ◽  
Fadi Nahab ◽  
Michael Frankel
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Modified Rankin Scale ◽  
Health Related Qol ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Degree Of Disability ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Eq5d Index

Background: Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score 0-2 is frequently used as a definition of good outcome in ischemic stroke trials. Patients with mRS 3 are frequently grouped with mRS 4-6 as having poor outcome yet there is limited data on health-related quality of life (QOL) across mRS scores. Objective: Determine QOL and levels of disability across mRS scores and to specifically compare mRS 2 and 3 outcome categories. Methods: A secondary analysis of the Interventional Management of Stroke 3 (IMS3) trial was performed. Patients with documented mRS, degree of disability assessed by Barthel Index (BI) and patient-completed EQ5D-3L quality of life questionnaires at 3 months after stroke were included. EQ5D index was calculated using utility weights published for the US population. Median and mean BI and EQ5D were compared across mRS categories. Multiple pairwise comparisons were performed and Bonferroni corrected p-values were used. No imputations were performed. Results: 423 patients were included (mean age 64±13 years, median ASPECTS 8 [IQR 6-10], median baseline NIHSS 16 [IQR 12-19], mean BI 84.1±25.3 and mean EQ5D index 0.727±0.24. Overall, there were inverse correlations between mRS and BI (Rho=-0.78, p<0.001) and between mRS and EQ5D (Rho=-0.69, p<0.001). While significant differences in BI were observed across several mRS categories including 1 vs 2, 2 vs 3 and 3 vs 4 (Fig A), there was no difference in QOL between mRS 2 (N=82) and 3 (N=88) categories (Fig B). Based on BI and EQ5D indices, mRS 3 had greater similarity to mRS 2 than to mRS 4 (Fig C). Conclusion: Health-related QOL is similar in patients who achieve mRS of 2 and 3 despite differences in degree of disability. If preservation of quality of life is the ultimate goal of acute stroke therapies, our results question the commonly used mRS 0-2 cut point used to dichotomize stroke outcomes.

Abstract 2472: The Negative Impact of Spasticity on the Health-Related Quality of Life of Stroke Survivors

Stroke ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Gillard ◽  
Heidi Sucharew ◽  
Sepideh Varon ◽  
Kathleen Alwell ◽  
Charles Moomaw ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Stroke Severity ◽  
Stroke Survivors ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related

Background: Spasticity can lead to numerous symptomatic and functional problems that can cause substantial disability. No published studies have quantified the independent effect spasticity has on the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of stroke survivors. Objective: To assess the hypothesis that spasticity has a negative impact on HRQoL among stroke survivors. Design: In 2005, as part of the Greater Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky Stroke Study, a cohort of 460 ischemic stroke patients were interviewed during hospitalization and then followed over time. Detailed in-person interviews and medical record abstractions were undertaken during the early post-stroke period to capture key information about demographics; pre-stroke level of functioning; social, family, and medical histories; medications; laboratory results; and stroke severity. Follow-up interviews at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years gathered information on HRQoL as measured by the Short Form-12 (SF-12), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), and Stroke Specific Quality of Life (SSQOL). SF-12 scores are divided into mental (MCS) and physical (PCS) components that range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health. EQ-5D scores range from 0 (death) to 1 (perfect health). SSQOL scores are stroke specific and range between 0 and 5, with lower scores indicating better HRQoL. HRQoL differences between stroke survivors with and without spasticity (as reported by the patient) were cross-sectionally compared using generalized linear models, adjusting for age, race, stroke severity, pre-stroke function, and comorbidities. Results: Of the 460 ischemic stroke patients, 328 had spasticity data available at the 3-month interview, with 54 (16%) reporting spasticity following their stroke. The patients included in the 3-month analysis had a mean age of 66 years; 49% were female, and 26% black. Patients who reported spasticity at 3 months had lower mean PCS, EQ-5D index, and SSQOL total score compared with patients without spasticity ( Table ). Similar differences in HRQoL were also observed at year 1 and year 2 (data not shown). Conclusions: We found statistically and clinically meaningful differences in HRQoL between stroke survivors with and without spasticity at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years following stroke. Clinically, these results suggest an opportunity to improve HRQoL among stroke survivors with effective spasticity management.

scholarly journals Quality of life in urologic cancer patients: importance of and satisfaction with specific quality of life domains

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katja Leuteritz ◽  
Diana Richter ◽  
Anja Mehnert-Theuerkauf ◽  
Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg ◽  
Andreas Hinz
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
General Population ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Patient Group ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Health Related Qol ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Importance Ratings ◽  
Subjective Importance

Abstract Purpose Quality of life (QoL) has been the subject of increasing interest in oncology. Most examinations of QoL have focused on health-related QoL, while other factors often remain unconsidered. Moreover, QoL questionnaires implicitly assume that the subjective importance of the various QoL domains is identical from one patient to the next. The aim of this study was to analyze QoL in a broader sense, considering the subjective importance of the QoL components. Methods A sample of 173 male urologic patients was surveyed twice: once while hospitalized (t1) and once again 3 months later (t2). Patients completed the Questions on Life Satisfaction questionnaire (FLZ-M), which includes satisfaction and importance ratings for eight dimensions of QoL. A control group was taken from the general population (n = 477). Results Health was the most important QoL dimension for both the patient and the general population groups. While satisfaction with health was low in the patient group, the satisfaction ratings of the other seven domains were higher in the patient group than in the general population. The satisfaction with the domain partnership/sexuality showed a significant decline from t1 to t2. Multiple regression analyses showed that the domains health and income contributed most strongly to the global QoL score at t2 in the patient group. Conclusion Health is not the only relevant category when assessing QoL in cancer patients; social relationships and finances are pertinent as well. Importance ratings contribute to a better understanding of the relevance of the QoL dimensions for the patients.

scholarly journals Quality of life assessments in clinical practice using either the EORTC-QLQ-C30 or the SEIOQL-DW: a randomized study

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Åsa Kettis ◽  
Hanna Fagerlind ◽  
Jan-Erik Frödin ◽  
Bengt Glimelius ◽  
Lena Ring
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Health Related Qol ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Background Effective patient-physician communication can improve patient understanding, agreement on treatment and adherence. This may, in turn, impact on clinical outcomes and patient quality of life (QoL). One way to improve communication is by using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Heretofore, studies of the impact of using PROMs in clinical practice have mostly evaluated the use of standardized PROMs. However, there is reason to believe that individualized instruments may be more appropriate for this purpose. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the standardized QoL-instrument, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life C-30 (EORTC-QOL-C30) and the individualized QoL instrument, the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life-Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW), in clinical practice. Methods In a prospective, open-label, controlled intervention study at two hospital out-patient clinics, 390 patients with gastrointestinal cancer were randomly assigned either to complete the EORTC-QOL-C30 or the SEIQoL-DW immediately before the consultation, with their responses being shared with their physician. This was repeated in 3–5 consultations over a period of 4–6 months. The primary outcome measure was patients’ health-related QoL, as measured by FACIT-G. Patients’ satisfaction with the consultation and survival were secondary outcomes. Results There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to study outcomes. Neither intervention instrument resulted in any significant changes in health-related QoL, or in any of the secondary outcomes, over time. This may reflect either a genuine lack of effect or sub-optimization of the intervention. Since there was no comparison to standard care an effect in terms of lack of deterioration over time cannot be excluded. Conclusions Future studies should focus on the implementation process, including the training of physicians to use the instruments and their motivation for doing so. The effects of situational use of standardized or individualized instruments should also be explored. The effectiveness of the different approaches may depend on contextual factors including physician and patient preferences.

Oral health related quality of life and it’s related factors of stroke patients at home in Korea

2015 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 523-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eun-Jin Jang ◽  
Eun-Kyong Kim ◽  
Kyeong-Soo Lee ◽  
Hee-Kyung Lee ◽  
Youn-Hee Choi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Oral Health ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
At Home
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document