Search

PurposeThe aims of this study were to examine quality of life, using the Impact of Cancer version 2 (IOCv2), in British non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) survivors and investigate differences between survivors in the UK and the USA.MethodsNHL survivors (326 UK and 667 US) completed the 37-item IOCv2 and psychological distress, fatigue and social support questionnaires.ResultsThe IOCv2 showed good reliability in the British sample with higher internal consistency (Cronbach alpha 0.7-0.9) and no floor and ceiling effects. UK survivors showed significantly higher negative (p

Purpose: The aim of this study was to identify the most appropriate measure of quality of life (QoL) for patients living with and beyond cancer. Methods: One hundred eighty-two people attending cancer clinics in Central London at various stages post-treatment, completed a series of QoL measures: FACT-G, EORTC QLQ-C30 , IOCv2 (positive and negative subscales) and WEMWBS, a wellbeing measure. These measures were chosen as the commonest measures used in previous research. Correlation tests were used to assess the association between scales. Participants were also asked about pertinence and ease of completion. Results: There was a significant positive correlation between the four domain scores of the two health-related QoL measures (.32 ≤ r ≤.72, P <.001), and a significant large negative correlation between these and the negative IOCv2 subscale scores (−.39 ≤ r ≤ −.63, P <.001). There was a significant moderate positive correlation between positive IOCv2 subscale and WEMWBS scores (r =.35, P <.001). However, neither the FACT-G nor the EORTC showed any significant correlation with the positive IOCv2 subscale. Participants rated all measures similarly with regards to pertinence and ease of use. Conclusion: There was little to choose between FACT-G, EORTC, and the negative IOC scales, any of which may be used to measure QoL. However, the two IOCv2 subscales capture unique aspects of QoL compared to the other measures. The IOCv2 can be used to identify those cancer survivors who would benefit from interventions to improve their QoL and to target specific needs thereby providing more holistic and personalised care beyond cancer treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To assess the impact of cancer ( IOC) on subsequent quality of life ( QOL), 718 long-term haematological cancer survivors completed validated psychosocial, functional and QOL scales, including IOC. Fifteen percent reported significant psychological distress, 18% high levels of fatigue and 10% moderate to severe functional impairment. These groups of participants also showed poorer QOL. There were no significant differences in psychological distress ( P = 0·76), fatigue ( P = 0·23) or functional impairment ( P = 0·74) across different cancer subtypes. Two separate hierarchical regression analyses examined the combined association of disease-type, psychosocial and other factors on negative and positive IOC scores respectively. Higher negative IOC scores were significantly associated ( P ≤ 0·001) with medical comorbidity, psychological distress, lower social support, high fatigue levels and functional impairment. Paediatric patients (diagnosed at <17 years) had significantly higher negative IOC scores than adult patients ( P = 0·001); greater years since diagnosis was significantly ( P < 0·001) associated with less negative IOC. Higher positive IOC was associated with acute leukaemia ( P = 0·01); lower positive IOC with paediatric patients ( P < 0·001), white ethnicity ( P < 0·001), higher education ( P = 0·003), no partner ( P = 0·01) and lower social support ( P = 0·01). Screening for medical comorbidity, psychological distress and fatigue identifies those needing most support and should allow earlier interventions to address negative and positive IOC to improve the well-being of cancer survivors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]