Evaluation of health-related quality of life and performance in intestinal transplant and rehabilitation patients: a cross-sectional study.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
Eunju Jang, Mi-Hyeong Kim, Jeong-Kye Hwang, Sun Cheol Park, Sang Seob Yun, Myung Duk Lee, Jae Hee Chung
{"title":"Evaluation of health-related quality of life and performance in intestinal transplant and rehabilitation patients: a cross-sectional study.","authors":"Eunju Jang, Mi-Hyeong Kim, Jeong-Kye Hwang, Sun Cheol Park, Sang Seob Yun, Myung Duk Lee, Jae Hee Chung","doi":"10.4174/astr.2025.108.1.31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We aimed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in intestinal failure (IF) patients after different modes of intestinal rehabilitation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>HRQoL was assessed using the generic 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36, ver. 2) and visual analogue scale (VAS) in 6 different areas: diet, sleep, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, diarrhea, musculoskeletal pain, and other symptoms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-two patients completed the questionnaires, of which 7 had received intestinal transplant (ITx), 9 were continuing home total parenteral nutrition (HPN), and 6 had tapered off total parenteral nutrition (TPN). SF-36 physical component summary scores were highest in the ITx group (median, 65.6; interquartile range [IQR], 31.6-80.3) compared to the HPN (median, 48.4; IQR, 44.7-66.3) or tapered group (median, 54.2; IQR, 45.2-61.6). Mental component summary scores were lowest in the ITx group (median, 48.8; IQR, 37.1-63.6), compared to the TPN (median, 60.2; IQR, 41.6-78.5) or tapered group (median, 51.0; IQR, 48.8-56.0). Differences were not significant in all items of the SF-36. VAS scores showed that patients in the ITx group showed the best results in diet (0.9), gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms (1.4), and musculoskeletal pain (2.4). There was a significant difference in sleep (P = 0.036), with the ITx (1.43) and HPN groups (1.33) showing better outcomes compared with the tapered group (4.67). Patients in the tapered group showed the least favorable results in all performance areas, except GI symptoms.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>SF-36 did not show a significant difference between the ITx, HPN, and tapered groups, but VAS showed a significant difference in sleep between groups. Further studies, including serial data, will allow a better understanding of the effects of different modes of intestinal rehabilitation.</p>","PeriodicalId":8071,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research","volume":"108 1","pages":"31-38"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11735166/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2025.108.1.31","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in intestinal failure (IF) patients after different modes of intestinal rehabilitation.

Methods: HRQoL was assessed using the generic 36-item Short Form Survey (SF-36, ver. 2) and visual analogue scale (VAS) in 6 different areas: diet, sleep, gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, diarrhea, musculoskeletal pain, and other symptoms.

Results: Twenty-two patients completed the questionnaires, of which 7 had received intestinal transplant (ITx), 9 were continuing home total parenteral nutrition (HPN), and 6 had tapered off total parenteral nutrition (TPN). SF-36 physical component summary scores were highest in the ITx group (median, 65.6; interquartile range [IQR], 31.6-80.3) compared to the HPN (median, 48.4; IQR, 44.7-66.3) or tapered group (median, 54.2; IQR, 45.2-61.6). Mental component summary scores were lowest in the ITx group (median, 48.8; IQR, 37.1-63.6), compared to the TPN (median, 60.2; IQR, 41.6-78.5) or tapered group (median, 51.0; IQR, 48.8-56.0). Differences were not significant in all items of the SF-36. VAS scores showed that patients in the ITx group showed the best results in diet (0.9), gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms (1.4), and musculoskeletal pain (2.4). There was a significant difference in sleep (P = 0.036), with the ITx (1.43) and HPN groups (1.33) showing better outcomes compared with the tapered group (4.67). Patients in the tapered group showed the least favorable results in all performance areas, except GI symptoms.

Conclusion: SF-36 did not show a significant difference between the ITx, HPN, and tapered groups, but VAS showed a significant difference in sleep between groups. Further studies, including serial data, will allow a better understanding of the effects of different modes of intestinal rehabilitation.

评估肠道移植和康复患者的健康相关生活质量和表现:一项横断面研究
目的:我们旨在评估不同肠道康复模式后肠衰竭(IF)患者的健康相关生活质量(HRQoL)。方法:采用通用的36项简短问卷调查(SF-36)对HRQoL进行评估。2)和视觉模拟量表(VAS)在6个不同领域:饮食、睡眠、胃肠道(GI)症状、腹泻、肌肉骨骼疼痛和其他症状。结果:22例患者完成了问卷调查,其中7例接受了肠移植(ITx), 9例继续家庭全肠外营养(HPN), 6例逐渐停止全肠外营养(TPN)。ITx组SF-36物理成分综合得分最高(中位数,65.6;四分位数间距[IQR], 31.6-80.3)与HPN相比(中位数,48.4;IQR, 44.7-66.3)或锥形组(中位数,54.2;差,45.2 - -61.6)。ITx组的心理成分总结得分最低(中位数48.8;IQR, 37.1-63.6),而TPN(中位数,60.2;IQR, 41.6-78.5)或锥形组(中位数,51.0;差,48.8 - -56.0)。SF-36的所有条目差异不显著。VAS评分显示,ITx组患者在饮食(0.9)、胃肠道(GI)症状(1.4)和肌肉骨骼疼痛(2.4)方面表现最佳。睡眠方面差异有统计学意义(P = 0.036), ITx组(1.43)和HPN组(1.33)优于锥形组(4.67)。除胃肠道症状外,锥形组患者在所有表现领域均表现最差。结论:ITx组、HPN组、锥形组SF-36评分差异无统计学意义,但VAS评分显示各组间睡眠差异有统计学意义。包括系列数据在内的进一步研究将有助于更好地了解不同肠道康复模式的效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.10%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Manuscripts to the Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research (Ann Surg Treat Res) should be written in English according to the instructions for authors. If the details are not described below, the style should follow the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publications available at International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) website (http://www.icmje.org).
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信