SCIENTIFIC-PRACTICAL JOURNAL

| укр | рус |

 

 


No1(1) 2018

Back to the issue


DOI 10.37219/2528-8253-2018-1-45

Kishchuk VV, Grytsun JP
Forms of scleroma – influence on the patients quality of life   
Kishchuk Vasyl V.
Vinnitsya National Pirogov Memorial Medical University
Department of Otolaryngology, Head of Department
Doctor of Medical Sciences, Professor
E-mail: kvv4488@ukr.net
Orchid ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3390-2401

Gritsun Yaroslav P.
Vinnitsya National Pirogov Memorial Medical University
Department of Otolaryngology
Assistant of the department

Abstract

Introduction. Despite world practice that problem of studying the quality of life in patients with scleroma remains virtually uninvestigated. Therefore the purpose of our study was to investigate changes in the quality of life of patients with scleroma and to evaluate this indicator in patients with different forms of the disease.
Materials and methods. There have been examined 92 patients (33 males, 59 females) with scleroma at the age from 23 to 79 years (at an average 53,5±14,57 years) and the duration of the disease from 1 to 48 years (at an average 17,63±11,94 years). The study of patients included assessment of complaints, general clinical score, results of examination of ENT-organs, endoscopy of larynx, trachea, bronchi. Quality of life indices were determined from enquirer Short version of Health enquirer – 36 (The MOS 36-item Short Form Health Survey – SF-36) in the following groups: 1) comparison group – apparently healthy persons (n=20); 2) patients with predominantly infiltrative form of scleroma (n=31); 3) patients with predominantly atrophic form of the disease (n=30); 4) patients with predominantly cicatricial form (n=31).
Results. The quality of life of patients with scleroma is accompanied by a significant decrease of an average of 18,4% compared with healthy individuals, mainly due to the physical component of health. Comparing the data of patients with predominantly infiltrative form of scleroma and healthy persons (control), significant differences were observed in the indicators of physical functioning (68,77±24,79% versus 93,75±7,58%; p <0,001) and social activity (69,22±25,97% versus 86,24±18,54%; p=0,014). This indicates the effect of the disease on the ability to with stand the physical activity during the day and the presence of problems in communicating with other people already at the initial stages of the disease. Mostly atrophic and cicatricial forms of scleroma lead to the most significant decrease in physical (39,35±10,89% and 37,26±9,73%, respectively) and the mental component of health (42,27±10,04% and 36,39±6,8%), as compared with healthy individuals and patients with predominantly infiltrative disease.
Conclusions. The study of the quality of life of patients with scleroma in clinical practice allows to determine the disease effect on the physical, psychological and social functioning of the patient and, along with the general clinical methods of the study, allows us to give a comprehensive assessment of the patient's condition and the effectiveness of his treatment.

Keywords

scleroma, quality of life.


Reference

  1. Dmitrenko IV, Kishchuk VV. [Experience in providing emergency care for patients with scleroma in acute respiratory failure]. Zhurnal vushnyh, nosovyh i gorlovyh hvorob. 2006; (3): 128-9. [Article in Ukrainian].
  2. Novik AA, Ionova TI. [Guide to the study of quality of life in medicine]. 2nd edition: ed. acad. RAMS Shevchenko YuL. Moscow: Olma Media Group, 2007; 320 p. [Article in Russian].
  3. Guide to the study of quality of life in medicine. 2nd edition: ed. acad. RAMS Yu.L. Shevchenko. Moscow: OLMA Media Group, 2007: 320 p. [Article in Russian].
  4.  Shevchenko YuL. [The concept of research on the quality of life in health care]. Medical News. 2001; (4): 51-2. [Article in Russian].
  5. Dunderdale K, Thompson DR, Beer SF, Furze G, Miles JN. Development and validation of a patient-centered health-related quality-of-life measure: the chronic heart failure assessment tool. J. Cardiovasc. Nurs. 2008;23(4):364-70.
  6. Brundage M, Bass B, Davidson J, Queenan J, Bezjak A, Ringash J, Wilkinson A, FeldmanStewart D. Patterns of reporting health-related quality of life outcomes in randomized clinical trials: implications for clinicians and quality of life researchers. Qual. Life Res. 2011;20(5):653-64.
  7. Dunderdale K, Thompson DR, Miles JN, Beer SF, Furze G. Quality-of-life measurement in chronic heart failure: do we take account of the patient perspective? Eur. J. Heart Fail. 2005;7(4):572-82.
  8. Spertus JA. Evolving applications for patientcentered health status measures. Circulation. 2008;118(20):2103-10.
 

© 2019, Public Organization «Ukrainian Scientific Medical Society of Otorhinolaryngologists»