肾移植后患者的生活质量:巴西 ADHERE 多中心横断面研究

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q1 NURSING Applied Nursing Research Pub Date : 2024-06-28 DOI:10.1016/j.apnr.2024.151815
Aline R.F. Almeida , Fabiane R.S. Grincenkov , Fernando A.B. Colugnati , José O. Medina-Pestana , Sabina De Geest , Helady Sanders-Pinheiro , On behalf of ADHERE Brazil Study Team
{"title":"肾移植后患者的生活质量:巴西 ADHERE 多中心横断面研究","authors":"Aline R.F. Almeida ,&nbsp;Fabiane R.S. Grincenkov ,&nbsp;Fernando A.B. Colugnati ,&nbsp;José O. Medina-Pestana ,&nbsp;Sabina De Geest ,&nbsp;Helady Sanders-Pinheiro ,&nbsp;On behalf of ADHERE Brazil Study Team","doi":"10.1016/j.apnr.2024.151815","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Quality of life (QoL) is a measure to evaluate kidney transplant (KT) results.</p></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><p>To describe the QoL profile in a larger sample of Brazilian patients who underwent KT according to age, sex, and access to KT.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a secondary data analysis of the ADHERE BRAZIL multicenter cross-sectional study including 1105 patients from 20 centers, considering KT access region and transplant activity. QoL was assessed by the WHOQOL-BREF. Data was compared using Generalized Estimating Equations.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Overall, 58.5 % of the patients were men, mean age of 47.6 ± 12.6 years. The general QoL score was 81 ± 15.1, 58.6 ± 11.6 for physical, 65.5 ± 11.4 for psychological, 68.3 ± 17.1 for social relationships, and 64.2 ± 13.3 for environmental domain. Higher QoL scores were observed in men compared to women in three WHOQOL-BREF domains: psychological (OR:2.62; CI, 1.29 ̶ 3.95, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.0001), social relationships (OR:3.21; CI, 1.2 ̶ 5.23, <em>p</em> = 0.002) and environmental (OR:3.79; CI:2.23 ̶ 5.35, p &lt; 0.0001). Younger patients (18–44 years) had higher scores in the psychological (OR:-2.69; CI, −4.13 ̶ -1.25; <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001; OR:-3.52; CI, −5.39 ̶ -1.66; p &lt; 0.001) and social (OR:-3.46; CI, −5.64 ̶ -1.27; p = 0.002; OR:-7.17; CI, −10 ̶ -4.35; p &lt; 0.0001) domains than older ones (45–59 and &gt; 60 years, respectively). Patients from higher KT access region had higher scores in environmental domain (OR:3.53; CI, 0.28 ̶ 6.78; <em>p</em> = 0.033).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Featuring the results of KT under patient view, the physical and social relationships domains were the most and least affected, respectively. Lower QoL subgroups (females and age &gt; 45 years) should be targeted in future multi-professional interventions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50740,"journal":{"name":"Applied Nursing Research","volume":"78 ","pages":"Article 151815"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality of life of patients after kidney transplant: ADHERE Brazil multicenter cross-sectional study\",\"authors\":\"Aline R.F. Almeida ,&nbsp;Fabiane R.S. Grincenkov ,&nbsp;Fernando A.B. Colugnati ,&nbsp;José O. Medina-Pestana ,&nbsp;Sabina De Geest ,&nbsp;Helady Sanders-Pinheiro ,&nbsp;On behalf of ADHERE Brazil Study Team\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.apnr.2024.151815\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Quality of life (QoL) is a measure to evaluate kidney transplant (KT) results.</p></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><p>To describe the QoL profile in a larger sample of Brazilian patients who underwent KT according to age, sex, and access to KT.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We conducted a secondary data analysis of the ADHERE BRAZIL multicenter cross-sectional study including 1105 patients from 20 centers, considering KT access region and transplant activity. QoL was assessed by the WHOQOL-BREF. Data was compared using Generalized Estimating Equations.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Overall, 58.5 % of the patients were men, mean age of 47.6 ± 12.6 years. The general QoL score was 81 ± 15.1, 58.6 ± 11.6 for physical, 65.5 ± 11.4 for psychological, 68.3 ± 17.1 for social relationships, and 64.2 ± 13.3 for environmental domain. Higher QoL scores were observed in men compared to women in three WHOQOL-BREF domains: psychological (OR:2.62; CI, 1.29 ̶ 3.95, <em>p</em> &lt; 0.0001), social relationships (OR:3.21; CI, 1.2 ̶ 5.23, <em>p</em> = 0.002) and environmental (OR:3.79; CI:2.23 ̶ 5.35, p &lt; 0.0001). Younger patients (18–44 years) had higher scores in the psychological (OR:-2.69; CI, −4.13 ̶ -1.25; <em>p</em> &lt; 0.001; OR:-3.52; CI, −5.39 ̶ -1.66; p &lt; 0.001) and social (OR:-3.46; CI, −5.64 ̶ -1.27; p = 0.002; OR:-7.17; CI, −10 ̶ -4.35; p &lt; 0.0001) domains than older ones (45–59 and &gt; 60 years, respectively). Patients from higher KT access region had higher scores in environmental domain (OR:3.53; CI, 0.28 ̶ 6.78; <em>p</em> = 0.033).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Featuring the results of KT under patient view, the physical and social relationships domains were the most and least affected, respectively. Lower QoL subgroups (females and age &gt; 45 years) should be targeted in future multi-professional interventions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50740,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Nursing Research\",\"volume\":\"78 \",\"pages\":\"Article 151815\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Nursing Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0897189724000533\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Nursing Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0897189724000533","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景生活质量(QoL)是评估肾移植(KT)结果的一项指标。目的根据年龄、性别和接受 KT 的机会,描述接受 KT 的巴西患者大样本的 QoL 情况。方法我们对 ADHERE BRAZIL 多中心横断面研究进行了二次数据分析,其中包括来自 20 个中心的 1105 名患者,并考虑了接受 KT 的地区和移植活动。QoL通过WHOQOL-BREF进行评估。结果总体而言,58.5%的患者为男性,平均年龄(47.6 ± 12.6)岁。总体 QoL 得分为 81 ± 15.1,身体 58.6 ± 11.6,心理 65.5 ± 11.4,社会关系 68.3 ± 17.1,环境 64.2 ± 13.3。与女性相比,男性在以下三个 WHOQOL-BREF 领域的 QoL 分数更高:心理(OR:2.62;CI:1.29 ̶3.95,p <0.0001)、社会关系(OR:3.21;CI:1.2 ̶5.23,p = 0.002)和环境(OR:3.79;CI:2.23 ̶5.35,p <0.0001)。年轻患者(18-44 岁)在心理(OR:-2.69; CI, -4.13 ̶ -1.25; p < 0.001;OR:-3.52; CI, -5.39 ̶ -1.66; p < 0.001)和社会(OR:-3.46; CI, -5.64 ̶ -1.27; p = 0.002; OR:-7.17; CI, -10 ̶ -4.35; p <0.0001)领域。来自 KT 获取率较高地区的患者在环境领域的得分更高(OR:3.53; CI, 0.28 ̶ 6.78; p = 0.033)。在未来的多专业干预中,应针对 QoL 较低的亚组(女性和 45 岁以上)进行干预。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Quality of life of patients after kidney transplant: ADHERE Brazil multicenter cross-sectional study

Background

Quality of life (QoL) is a measure to evaluate kidney transplant (KT) results.

Aim

To describe the QoL profile in a larger sample of Brazilian patients who underwent KT according to age, sex, and access to KT.

Methods

We conducted a secondary data analysis of the ADHERE BRAZIL multicenter cross-sectional study including 1105 patients from 20 centers, considering KT access region and transplant activity. QoL was assessed by the WHOQOL-BREF. Data was compared using Generalized Estimating Equations.

Results

Overall, 58.5 % of the patients were men, mean age of 47.6 ± 12.6 years. The general QoL score was 81 ± 15.1, 58.6 ± 11.6 for physical, 65.5 ± 11.4 for psychological, 68.3 ± 17.1 for social relationships, and 64.2 ± 13.3 for environmental domain. Higher QoL scores were observed in men compared to women in three WHOQOL-BREF domains: psychological (OR:2.62; CI, 1.29 ̶ 3.95, p < 0.0001), social relationships (OR:3.21; CI, 1.2 ̶ 5.23, p = 0.002) and environmental (OR:3.79; CI:2.23 ̶ 5.35, p < 0.0001). Younger patients (18–44 years) had higher scores in the psychological (OR:-2.69; CI, −4.13 ̶ -1.25; p < 0.001; OR:-3.52; CI, −5.39 ̶ -1.66; p < 0.001) and social (OR:-3.46; CI, −5.64 ̶ -1.27; p = 0.002; OR:-7.17; CI, −10 ̶ -4.35; p < 0.0001) domains than older ones (45–59 and > 60 years, respectively). Patients from higher KT access region had higher scores in environmental domain (OR:3.53; CI, 0.28 ̶ 6.78; p = 0.033).

Conclusions

Featuring the results of KT under patient view, the physical and social relationships domains were the most and least affected, respectively. Lower QoL subgroups (females and age > 45 years) should be targeted in future multi-professional interventions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Nursing Research
Applied Nursing Research 医学-护理
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
65
审稿时长
70 days
期刊介绍: Applied Nursing Research presents original, peer-reviewed research findings clearly and directly for clinical applications in all nursing specialties. Regular features include "Ask the Experts," research briefs, clinical methods, book reviews, news and announcements, and an editorial section. Applied Nursing Research covers such areas as pain management, patient education, discharge planning, nursing diagnosis, job stress in nursing, nursing influence on length of hospital stay, and nurse/physician collaboration.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Implementing MATRIX acuity tool to improve nursing satisfaction on a stroke and epilepsy monitoring unit Artificial intelligence in nursing practice – A Delphi study with ChatGPT Mental health misconceptions among at-risk populations: The case of hotel workers What are the attitudes and perceptions of general practitioners about the role of nurse practitioners in the community care setting: A scoping review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1