首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     

FLIC、SF-36和QOL-LC量表在肝癌患者生活质量测定中的应用比较
引用本文:祝葆华,万崇华,王坤,苑进凯,许传志,孟琼. FLIC、SF-36和QOL-LC量表在肝癌患者生活质量测定中的应用比较[J]. 中国循证医学杂志, 2012, 12(10): 1175-1179
作者姓名:祝葆华  万崇华  王坤  苑进凯  许传志  孟琼
作者单位:1. 广东医学院第一临床学院,东莞,523808
2. 广东医学院人文与管理学院暨生命质量与应用心理研究中心,东莞,523808
3. 昆明医科大学公共卫生学院,昆明,650031
基金项目:广东省高等学校人才引进专项资金项目(编号:GK1003);云南省社会发展科技计划项目(编号:2008CD055)
摘    要:
目的比较癌症患者生活功能指标量表(FLIC)、健康调查简表(SF-36)和肝癌患者生活质量测定量表(QOL-LC)在肝癌患者生活质量测定中的应用效果。方法以2010~2011年选定的调查医院肝癌住院患者105例为研究对象,采用FLIC、SF-36和QOL-LC量表分别进行3次纵向测定,计算和比较各量表的信度、效度和反应度。结果 QOL-LC的效度、信度比FLIC和SF-36量表好;在反应度方面,QOL-LC及FLIC量表均显示躯体功能与总生命质量的变化差异有统计学意义(QOL-LC:t=5.08;P=0.000;t=3.16;P=0.002;FLIC:t=4.02;P=0.000;t=2.21;P=0.030)。SF-36量表除一般健康状况和心理健康两个领域外,其余领域的治疗前后得分变化均有统计学意义(躯体功能t=5.94;P=0.000;躯体角色t=3.07;P=0.003;身体疼痛t=3.21;P=0.002;生命力t=3.22;P=0.002;社会角色t=2.60;P=0.012;情绪角色t=3.28;P=0.002)。结论 QOL-LC是测定肝癌患者生活质量的特异量表,在评估肝癌患者生活质量时是首选,而SF-36和FLIC量表能反映肝癌患者生命质量的共性部分,在缺少特异性量表的情况下,可用于测评肝癌患者的生活质量。

关 键 词:肝癌  生活质量评估  SF-36量表  QOL-LC量表  FLIC量表

Comparisons among FLIC, SF-36 and QOL-LC in Measuring Quality of Life of Patients with Liver Cancer
ZHU Bao-hua , WAN Chong-hua , WANG Kun , YUAN Jin-kai , XU Chuan-zhi , MENG Qiong. Comparisons among FLIC, SF-36 and QOL-LC in Measuring Quality of Life of Patients with Liver Cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Evidence-based Medicine, 2012, 12(10): 1175-1179
Authors:ZHU Bao-hua    WAN Chong-hua    WANG Kun    YUAN Jin-kai    XU Chuan-zhi    MENG Qiong
Affiliation:1. The First Clinical College, Guangdong Medical College, Dongguan 523808, China; 2. Humanity and Administration College & Life Quality and Applicable Psychology Research Center, Guangdong Medical College, Dongguan 523808, China; 3. Public Health College, Kunming Medical University, Kunming 650031, China)
Abstract:
Objective To compare the application effects of three psychometric instruments including SF-36, FLIC and QOL-LC in measuring the quality of life of patients with liver cancer. Methods A total of 105 in-patients with liver cancer selected from 2010 to 2011 were included. The quality of life was measured by FLIC, SF-36 and QOL-LC, respectively, and the reliability, validity and responsiveness were calculated and analyzed. Results The reliability and validity of QOL-LC were better than those of SF-36 and FLIC. Both QOL-LC and FLIC showed significant differences in responsiveness based on the changes of physical function and overall quality of life (QOL-LC: t=5.08, P=0.000, t=3.16, P=0.002; FLIC: t=4.02, P=0.000, t=2.21, P=0.030). Except for general health and mental health, the other domains of SF-36 showed significant differences in changes after treatment (physical function: t=5.94, P=O.O00; physical role: t=3.07, P=0.003; body pain: t=3.21, P=O.002; vital- ity: t=3.22, P=0.002; social role: t=2.60, P=0.012; emotional role: t=3.28, P=0.002). Conclusion QOL-LC is a specific scale for liver cancer, and it should be used preferentially. SF-36 and FLIC can measure the general state of quality of life and can be used in patients with liver cancer when specific scale is not available.
Keywords:Liver cancer  Quality of life assessment  SF-36  QOL-LC  FLIC
本文献已被 CNKI 维普 万方数据 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号