مجله دانشگاه علوم پزشکی سبزوار

شماره جاری

بر اساس شماره‌های نشریه

بر اساس نویسندگان

بر اساس موضوعات

نمایه نویسندگان

نمایه کلیدواژه ها

درباره نشریه

اهداف و چشم انداز

اعضای هیات تحریریه

اصول اخلاقی انتشار مقاله

بانک ها و نمایه نامه ها

پیوندهای مفید

فرایند پذیرش مقالات

اخبار و اعلانات

فرم های ضروری نشریه

راهنمای تنظیم مقاله

راهنمای نگارش خلاصه سیاستی

فرم خلاصه سیاستی

ارزیابی کیفیت زندگی در مولتیپل اسکلروزیس: بررسی تفاوت ادراک پزشکان، بیماران و مراقبان بیماران

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دکتری روان‌شناسی، دانشکده علوم تربیتی و روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

2 دانشیار گروه روان‌پزشکی، مرکز تحقیقات روان‌پزشکی و علوم رفتاری، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی، مشهد، ایران

3 استادیار گروه روان‌پزشکی، مرکز تحقیقات روان‌پزشکی و علوم رفتاری، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی مشهد، مشهد، ایران

چکیده

 
زمینه و هدف: مولتیپل اسکلروزیس ازجمله بیماری­های مزمن است که زندگی افراد مبتلا را به‌شدت تحت‌تأثیر قرار می‌دهد از این‌رو در این پژوهش، تفاوت ادارک پزشکان، بیماران و مراقبان بیماران مولتیپل اسکلروزیس از کیفیت­زندگی مورد بررسی و مقایسه تطبیقی قرار گرفته است.
مواد و روش­ها: پژوهش حاضر به لحاظ هدف، کاربردی است، از بین تمام بیماران MS، مراقبان آنها و نورولوژیست­­های شهرستان مشهد، 66 نفر بیمار مبتلا به بیماری MS، 66 نفر نورولوژیست و 66 نفر از مراقبان بیماران مبتلا به MS  با نمونه‌گیری در دسترس انتخاب شدند و به پرسش‌نامه کیفیت زندگی مربوط به سلامت SF-36 پاسخ دادند. تحلیل یافته­ها با استفاده از آزمون‌های مقایسه میانگین و تحلیل واریانس انجام پذیرفت و تحلیل اطلاعات از نرم‌افزار SPSS استفاده گردید.
یافته­ها: نتایج تحلیل واریانس نشان داد میزان کیفیت زندگی از نظر گروه بیماران 49/53، از نظر گروه مراقبان 35/50 و از نظر گروه پزشکان 34/49 می‌باشد. نتایج نشان می‌دهند که از دیدگاه بیماران در بین خرده­مقیاس­های کیفیت زندگی میانگین نمرات انرژی/خستگی در بین گروه‌ها تفاوت معنی‌داری دارد و بر اساس رتبه­بندی در دیدگاه بیماران، انرژی و خستگی، از دیدگاه مراقبان اختلال نقش به دلیل سلامت جسمی و از دیدگاه پزشکان اختلال نقش به دلیل سلامت جسمی، کمترین ضریب میانگین را در کیفیت زندگی بیمارانMS  دارند.
نتیجه‌گیری: بین درک پزشکان، مراقبان و بیماران از کیفیت زندگی بیماران، تفاوت‌هایی از نظر شاخص­های ذهنی بیماری وجود دارد که می‌توان با ادراک مناسب آنها بر کیفیت حمایت از بیمار و زندگی او تأثیر گذاشت.

تازه های تحقیق

https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=fa&user=lrK1j5QAAAAJ&

https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=fa&user=lrK1j5QAAAAJ&

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=dwq5edgAAAAJ&hl=id&oi=ao

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=Hamzeh+Ahmadian%5bAuthor%5d

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=zW26thIAAAAJ&hl=id&oi=ao

https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=zW26thIAAAAJ&hl=id&oi=ao

 

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات

عنوان مقاله [English]

Assessing Quality of Life in Multiple Sclerosis: Exploring Perceptual Differences among Doctors, Patients, and Caregivers

نویسندگان [English]

  • Alireza gol 1
  • Farshad FaridHosseini 2
  • Mahsa Nahidi 3

1 PhD student of psychology, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Mashhad Ferdowsi University, Mashhad, Iran

2 2. Associate Professor, Department of Psychiatry, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

3 Associate Professor, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

چکیده [English]

Introduction: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease that significantly impacts patients' lives. This study examines and compares the perceptions of neurologists, patients, and caregivers regarding the quality of life of MS patients.
Materials and Methods: This applied research was conducted among MS patients, their caregivers, and neurologists in Mashhad, Iran. 66 MS patients, 66 neurologists, and 66 caregivers completed the SF-36 health-related quality of life questionnaire. The data were analyzed using mean comparison tests and SPSS-27.
Results: The analysis of variance revealed that the QoL scores were 53.49 for patients, 50.35 for caregivers, and 49.34 for physicians. Notably, from the patients’ perspective, the energy/fatigue sub-scale exhibited the most significant differences among groups. Caregivers perceived role limitations due to physical health as the most affected factor, while physicians identified role limitations as the lowest-scoring factor impacting MS patients' QoL.
Conclusion: There are notable differences in the understanding of QoL among physicians, caregivers, and patients, particularly regarding mental health indicators. These discrepancies can influence patient support and overall well-being. Awareness of these variations can enhance patient care and improve QoL.
 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Quality of life
  • Multiple sclerosis
  • Disease perception
مراجع
  1. Bopp T, Stellefson M, Weatherall B, Spratt S. Promoting physical literacy for disadvantaged youth living with chronic disease. American Journal of Health Education. 2019;50(3):153-158. DOI: 10.1080/19325037.2019.1590263
  2. Fleming KM, Coote SB, Herring MP. The feasibility of Pilates to improve symptoms of anxiety, depression, and fatigue among people with Multiple Sclerosis: An eight-week randomized controlled pilot trial. Psychology of Sport and Exercise. 2019;45:101573. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2019.101573
  3. Browne P, Chandraratna D, Angood C, et al. Atlas of multiple sclerosis 2013: a growing global problem with widespread inequity. Neurology. 2014;83(11):1022-1024. DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000000768
  4. Maresa J, Hartung H-P. Multiple sclerosis and COVID-19. Biomedical Papers of the Medical Faculty of Palacky University in Olomouc. 2020;164 DOI: 10.5507/bp.2020.033
  5. Confavreux C, Compston A. The natural history of multiple sclerosis. McAlpine's Multiple Sclerosis. 2006:183–272. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-443-07271-0.50006-9. DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-443-07271-0.50006-9
  6. Rezaeian Langroodi R, Ghiasian M, Roozbehani M, Shamsaei F. Comparison of the Effectiveness of Yoga and Psychotherapy group Therapy Based on Acceptance and Commitment on Fatigue and Quality of Life of Multiple Sclerosis Patients. Avicenna Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Care. 2020;28(4):62-73.  Doi: 10.30699/ajnmc.28.4.63 (Persian)
  7. Tavakoli Saleh S, Ebrahimi ME. Effectivenes of Acceptance-Commitment Therapy on the Resillience and Psycological Well-being of Female Patients with Multiple Sclerosis in Hamadan, Iran. Avicenna Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2021;28(2):126-133. DOI: 10.52547/ajcm.28.2.126 (Persian)
  8. Rostamnezhad M, Tayyebi PD, A., Abolghasemi PD, S., EbrahimiRad PD, R. Presentation of a Structural Model Explaining MS Patients’ Quality of Life based on their Lifestyle with the Mediating Role of Psychological Capital. Quarterly Journal Of Family and Research. 2021;18(1):87-104 DOI: 20.1001.1.26766728.1400.18.1.5.4 (Persian)
  9. Aliakbari dehkordi M, Dehkhodaei S. The Effectiveness of Enriching Interpersonal Relationship Based on Emotionally Focused Therapy on Psychosocial -Social Adjustment and Social Health in Married Women with Multiple Sclerosis. Social Psychology Research. 2020;10(38):101-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22034/spr.2020.114697 (Persian)
  10. Bishop M, Stenhoff DM, Shepard L. Psychosocial adaptation and quality of life in multiple sclerosis: assessment of the disability centrality model. Journal of rehabilitation. 2007;73 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00343552211034819
  11. Zheng M, Jin H, Shi N, et al. The relationship between health literacy and quality of life: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Health and quality of life outcomes. 2018;16:1-10. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-018-1031-7
  12. 1Ehmann AT, Groene O, Rieger MA, Siegel A. The relationship between health literacy, quality of life, and subjective health: Results of a cross-sectional study in a rural region in Germany. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2020;17(5):1683. DOI:  10.3390/ijerph17051683
  13.  
  14. Hakiminya B, Poorafkari N, Ghafari D. Factors affecting quality of life with emphasis on social intelligence and social health (the case of Kermanshah city). Journal of Applied Sociology. 2017;28(2):163-178. DOI: 10.22108/jas.2018.74645.0 (Persian)
  15. Rowlands G, Shaw A, Jaswal S, et al. Health literacy and the social determinants of health: a qualitative model from adult learners. Health promotion international. 2017;32(1):130-138. DOI: 10.1093/heapro/dav093
  16. Griffey RT, Kennedy SK, McGownan L, et al. Is low health literacy associated with increased emergency department utilization and recidivism? Academic Emergency Medicine. 2014;21(10):1109-1115. DOI: 10.1111/acem.12476
  17. Khaleghi M, AMIN SF, Peyman N. The relationship between health literacy and health-related quality of life in students. 2019. DOI: 10.30699/ijhehp.7.1.66
  18. Kazemi M, Barkhordari-Sharifabad M, Nasiriani K, Fallahzadeh H. The Correlation of Health Literacy with Quality of Life in Asthmatic Patients. Iran Journal of Nursing. 2019;3. 54-67, 2(121). DOI: 10.29252/ijn.32.121.50 (Persian)
  19. Blanco-Rivera C, Capeans-Tome C, Otero-Cepeda X. Quality of life in patients with choroidal melanoma. Archivos de la Sociedad Española de Oftalmología. 2008;83(5):301-306. DOI: 10.4321/s0365-66912008000500005
  20. Bassi M, Cilia S, Falautano M, et al. Illness perceptions and psychological adjustment among persons with multiple sclerosis: the mediating role of coping strategies and social support. Disability and rehabilitation. 2020;42(26):3780-3792. DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2019.1610511.
  21. Spain L, Tubridy N, Kilpatrick T, et al. Illness perception and health‐related quality of life in multiple sclerosis. Acta Neurologica Scandinavica. 2007;116(5):293-299. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0404.2007.00895.x.
  22. Woodhouse S, Hebbard G, Knowles SR. Exploring symptom severity, illness perceptions, coping styles, and well-being in gastroparesis patients using the common sense model. Digestive Diseases and Sciences. 2018;63:958-965. DOI: 10.1007/s10620-018-4975-x
  23. Sami P, Emamipoor S, Rafiepoor A. The Effectiveness of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) on Disease Perception and Adherence to Treatment AmongPatients with Multiple Sclerosis. International Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences. 2021;8(3):13-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22037/ijabs.v8i3.32856
  24. Kremenchutzky M, Walt L. Perceptions of health status in multiple sclerosis patients and their doctors. Canadian journal of neurological sciences. 2013;40(2):210-218. DOI: 10.1017/s0317167100013755
  25. Edmonds P, Vivat B, Burman R, et al. Fighting for everything': service experiences of people severely affected by multiple sclerosis. Multiple Sclerosis Journal. 2007;13(5):660-667. DOI: 10.1177/1352458506071789
  26.  
  27.  
  28. Schlegel V, Leray E. From medical prescription to patient compliance: a qualitative insight into the neurologist–patient relationship in multiple sclerosis. International Journal of MS Care. 2018;20(6):279-286. DOI: 10.7224/1537-2073.2017-043
  29. Ponzio M, Tacchino A, Zaratin P, et al. Unmet care needs of people with a neurological chronic disease: a cross-sectional study in Italy on multiple sclerosis. The European Journal of Public Health. 2015;25(5):775-780. DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/ckv065
  30. Masoudi R, Khayeri F, Rabiei L, Zarea K. A study of stigma among Iranian family caregivers of patients with multiple sclerosis: A descriptive explorative qualitative study. Applied Nursing Research. 2017;34:1-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.apnr.2016.11.012
  31. Etemadifar M, Izadi S, Nikseresht A, et al. Estimated prevalence and incidence of multiple sclerosis in Iran. European neurology. 2014;72(5-6):370-374. DOI: 10.1159/000365846
  32. Eskandarieh S, Heydarpour P, Elhami S-R, Sahraian MA. Prevalence and incidence of multiple sclerosis in Tehran, Iran. Iranian journal of public health. 2017;46(5):699. PMID: 28560202
  33. Khodaveisi M, Rahmati M, Falahinia G, et al. The Effect of Orem’s Self Care Model on Physical Quality Of Life in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis. Scientific Journal of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedical Faculty. 2018;3(4):24-35. DOI: 10.29252/sjnmp.3.4.24 (Persian)
  34. Hazrati M, Zahmatkeshan N, Dejbakhsh T, et al. The Effect of Rehabilitation Process on the Quality of Life in Multiple Sclerosis Patients. Armaghane Danesh. 2005;10(3):53-65. DOI: 10.18502/ijrm.v20i4.10897 (Persian)
  35. Haresabadi M, Karimi Monaghi H, Froghipor M, Mazlom SR. Quality of Life in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis referring to Ghaem Hospital, Mashhad in 2009. North Khorasan University of Medical Sciences. 2011;2(4):7-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.dhjo.2019.03.007. Epub 2019 Mar 28. (Persian)
  36. Taraghi Z, Ilali E, ABEDINI M, et al. Quality of life among multiple sclerosis patients. 2007. PMCID: PMC3019078  PMID: 21254730
  37. Heidari Sureshjani S, Eslami AA, Hassanzadeh A. The Quality of Life among Multiple Sclerosis Patients in Isfahan, Iran. Health System Research. 2012. 5(7). DOI: 10.1016/S0074-7742(07)79016-5.  (Persian)
  38. Janardhan V, Bakshi R. Quality of life in patients with multiple sclerosis: the impact of fatigue and depression. Journal of the neurological sciences. 2002;205(1):51-58. DOI: 10.1016/s0022-510x(02)00312-x
  39. Willoughby E. Modafinil for fatigue in multiple sclerosis. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry. 2002;72(2):150. DOI: 10.1136/jnnp.72.2.150
  40. Solari A, Ferrari G, Radice D. A longitudinal survey of self-assessed health trends in a community cohort of people with multiple sclerosis and their significant others. Journal of the neurological sciences. 2006;243(1-2):13-20. DOI: 10.1007/s10072-001-8173-8
  41.  
  42. Benito‐Leon J, Morales J, Rivera‐Navarro J. Health‐related quality of life and its relationship to cognitive and emotional functioning in multiple sclerosis patients. European journal of neurology. 2002;9(5):497-502. Doi: 10.1046/j.1468-1331.2002.00450.x.
  43. Bahrami M, Parker S, Blackman I. Patients’ quality of life: a comparison of patient and nurse perceptions. Contemporary nurse. 2008;29(1):67-79. Doi: 10.5172/conu.673.29.1.67.
  44. McPherson CJ, Addington-Hall JM. Judging the quality of care at the end of life: can proxies provide reliable information? Social science & medicine. 2003;56(1):95-109. DOI: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00011-4
  45. Essen Lv. Proxy ratings of patient quality of life factors related to patient–proxy agreement. Acta oncologica. 2004;43(3):229-234. DOI: 10.1080/02841860410029357
  46. Jenkinson C, Stewart-Brown S, Petersen S, Paice C. Assessment of the SF-36 version 2 Doi: 10.1136/jech.53.1.46
  47. in the United Kingdom. Journal of Epidemiology and Community health. 1999;53(1):46-50.
  48. Maslić Seršić D, Vuletić G. Psychometric evaluation and establishing norms of Croatian SF-36 health survey: framework for subjective health research. Croatian medical journal. 2006;47(1):95-102. PMID: 16489702
  49. Ghafari R, Rafiei M. Validity and reliability of Persian version of SF-36 version 2. [GP thesis]. Arak University of Medical Sciences, Medical Faculity,  2012. PMID: 16602453  (Persian)
مجله دانشگاه علوم پزشکی سبزوار
دوره 32، شماره 1
فروردین و اردیبهشت 1404
صفحه 98-109
فایل ها
سابقه مقاله
  • تاریخ دریافت: 25 آذر 1403
  • تاریخ بازنگری: 29 مهر 1403
  • تاریخ پذیرش: 29 مهر 1403
هم رسانی
ارجاع به این مقاله
آمار