4.5 Article

Health related quality of life in patients with neuroendocrine tumors compared with the general Norwegian population

Journal

QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH
Volume 18, Issue 6, Pages 719-726

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-009-9487-x

Keywords

Health related quality of life; SF-36; NET patients; Sociodemographic; Disease specific characteristics

Funding

  1. The National Competence Centre for Neuroendocrine Tumors in Norway

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Health related quality of life (HRQoL) was characterized among patients with neuroendocrine tumor (NET) and compared with the general Norwegian population. A cross sectional, comparative design was chosen, and the samples comprised 196 NET patients and 5,258 individuals from the general Norwegian population. We used Chi-square cross tab calculations to evaluate sociodemographic characteristics, T-tests for independent samples and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) in order to compare HRQoL (SF-36) scores across a range of background variables. Furthermore, T-tests were used to analyze differences in HRQoL scores between the samples. NET patients demonstrated significantly lower on all HRQoL subscales when compared with the general population with the lowest values on general health, physical limitation and vitality. Individuals above 70 years reported lower scores on physical functioning and physical limitations compared with those who were younger. Individuals with higher levels of education reported increased physical functioning compared with those with less education and full-time or part-time workers described higher physical functioning and less physical limitations compared with those who were retired. All SF-36 HRQoL scores were significantly lower among the NET patients when compared with the general population. Assistance from health personnel to NET patients should focus on those domains.

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