比较护理人员对癌症疼痛的认识和感知与患者的疼痛评估并评估其生活质量的前瞻性研究

IF 1.1 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Divyesh Kumar, T. Dey, Mini Arora
{"title":"比较护理人员对癌症疼痛的认识和感知与患者的疼痛评估并评估其生活质量的前瞻性研究","authors":"Divyesh Kumar, T. Dey, Mini Arora","doi":"10.25259/ijpc_133_2021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\nFamily caregivers (FCGs) play a crucial role in the home care of terminally ill patients. Therefore, evaluating their comprehension of patients’ symptoms and doctors’ advice becomes crucial. Moreover, this might negatively impact their quality of life (QOL). Thus, the purpose of the study was to examine FCGs’ perception and understanding of cancer pain in relation to patients’ pain assessments, as well as the effect this has on their own QOL.\n\n\n\nThe family pain questionnaire (FPQ) and patient pain questionnaire (PPQ) were used for both patient as well as their FCGs. The scores for each subscale, knowledge, and experience were calculated. Furthermore, FCGs’ own QOL was assessed using the caregiver quality of life index-cancer (CQOLC) questionnaire. Results were statistically analysed.\n\n\n\nThe FCGs of 93 individuals were examined. The Cronbach alphas for the current dataset showed that the FPQ (0.754) and PPQ (0.759) overall reliability scales were satisfactory. The knowledge, experience, and total average scores for the PPQ (FPQ) subscales were reported as 35.91 (35.31), 27.19 (26.86), and 63.10 (62.17), respectively. The knowledge, experience, and overall scales of the PPQ (FPQ) were evaluated to provide median scores of 37 (36), 28 (25), and 65 (62) correspondingly. A t-test was used to determine the significance of the observed average differences (d) for knowledge (0.602), experience (0.333), and overall (0.935). The results showed that there were no significant differences (P > 0.05). An inverse relationship was elicited between the total QOL and the pain assessment scores of FCGs, as well as the age of the patient. The difference was, however, majorly statistically non-significant (P > 0.5). Further, statistical significance was found only between the burden component of the CQOLC and the age of the patients (P = 0.034), as well as total pain knowledge (P = 0.007) and total pain scores (P = 0.001) of the FCGs’.\n\n\n\nAs per our analysis, FCGs had less knowledge and experience of patients’ pain, though statistically , it was not significant. The age of the patient, as well as total pain knowledge and total pain scores of the FCGs’ were found to affect the QOL of FCGs’. Studies with large sample sizes might help in strengthening the findings.\n","PeriodicalId":13319,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Palliative Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Prospective Study to Compare Caregivers’ Knowledge and Perception of Cancer Pain with Patients’ Pain Assessment and to Evaluate their Quality of Life\",\"authors\":\"Divyesh Kumar, T. Dey, Mini Arora\",\"doi\":\"10.25259/ijpc_133_2021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n\\nFamily caregivers (FCGs) play a crucial role in the home care of terminally ill patients. Therefore, evaluating their comprehension of patients’ symptoms and doctors’ advice becomes crucial. Moreover, this might negatively impact their quality of life (QOL). Thus, the purpose of the study was to examine FCGs’ perception and understanding of cancer pain in relation to patients’ pain assessments, as well as the effect this has on their own QOL.\\n\\n\\n\\nThe family pain questionnaire (FPQ) and patient pain questionnaire (PPQ) were used for both patient as well as their FCGs. The scores for each subscale, knowledge, and experience were calculated. Furthermore, FCGs’ own QOL was assessed using the caregiver quality of life index-cancer (CQOLC) questionnaire. Results were statistically analysed.\\n\\n\\n\\nThe FCGs of 93 individuals were examined. The Cronbach alphas for the current dataset showed that the FPQ (0.754) and PPQ (0.759) overall reliability scales were satisfactory. The knowledge, experience, and total average scores for the PPQ (FPQ) subscales were reported as 35.91 (35.31), 27.19 (26.86), and 63.10 (62.17), respectively. The knowledge, experience, and overall scales of the PPQ (FPQ) were evaluated to provide median scores of 37 (36), 28 (25), and 65 (62) correspondingly. A t-test was used to determine the significance of the observed average differences (d) for knowledge (0.602), experience (0.333), and overall (0.935). The results showed that there were no significant differences (P > 0.05). An inverse relationship was elicited between the total QOL and the pain assessment scores of FCGs, as well as the age of the patient. The difference was, however, majorly statistically non-significant (P > 0.5). Further, statistical significance was found only between the burden component of the CQOLC and the age of the patients (P = 0.034), as well as total pain knowledge (P = 0.007) and total pain scores (P = 0.001) of the FCGs’.\\n\\n\\n\\nAs per our analysis, FCGs had less knowledge and experience of patients’ pain, though statistically , it was not significant. The age of the patient, as well as total pain knowledge and total pain scores of the FCGs’ were found to affect the QOL of FCGs’. Studies with large sample sizes might help in strengthening the findings.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":13319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Palliative Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25259/ijpc_133_2021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/ijpc_133_2021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

家庭护理人员(FCGs)在临终病人的家庭护理中起着至关重要的作用。因此,评估他们对病人症状和医生建议的理解能力变得至关重要。此外,这可能会对他们的生活质量(QOL)产生负面影响。因此,本研究的目的是考察家庭医生对癌症疼痛的感知和理解与患者疼痛评估的关系,以及这对他们自身 QOL 的影响。对患者及其家属使用了家属疼痛问卷(FPQ)和患者疼痛问卷(PPQ),并计算了每个分量表、知识和经验的得分。此外,还使用癌症护理者生活质量指数(CQOLC)问卷对癌症护理者自身的生活质量进行了评估。对结果进行了统计分析。当前数据集的 Cronbach alphas 表明,FPQ(0.754)和 PPQ(0.759)总体信度量表令人满意。据报告,PPQ(FPQ)分量表的知识、经验和总平均分分别为 35.91(35.31)、27.19(26.86)和 63.10(62.17)。经评估,PPQ(FPQ)的知识、经验和总分的中位数分别为 37(36)分、28(25)分和 65(62)分。对知识(0.602)、经验(0.333)和总分(0.935)的平均差异(d)进行了 t 检验,以确定其显著性。结果表明,差异不显著(P>0.05)。QOL 总分与 FCGs 疼痛评估得分以及患者年龄之间呈反比关系。不过,两者之间的差异在统计学上并不显著(P > 0.5)。此外,只有 CQOLC 的负担部分与患者年龄(P = 0.034)以及 FCGs 的疼痛知识总分(P = 0.007)和疼痛总分(P = 0.001)之间存在统计学意义。我们发现,患者的年龄、疼痛知识和疼痛总分都会影响家庭医生的 QOL。样本量较大的研究可能有助于加强研究结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Prospective Study to Compare Caregivers’ Knowledge and Perception of Cancer Pain with Patients’ Pain Assessment and to Evaluate their Quality of Life
Family caregivers (FCGs) play a crucial role in the home care of terminally ill patients. Therefore, evaluating their comprehension of patients’ symptoms and doctors’ advice becomes crucial. Moreover, this might negatively impact their quality of life (QOL). Thus, the purpose of the study was to examine FCGs’ perception and understanding of cancer pain in relation to patients’ pain assessments, as well as the effect this has on their own QOL. The family pain questionnaire (FPQ) and patient pain questionnaire (PPQ) were used for both patient as well as their FCGs. The scores for each subscale, knowledge, and experience were calculated. Furthermore, FCGs’ own QOL was assessed using the caregiver quality of life index-cancer (CQOLC) questionnaire. Results were statistically analysed. The FCGs of 93 individuals were examined. The Cronbach alphas for the current dataset showed that the FPQ (0.754) and PPQ (0.759) overall reliability scales were satisfactory. The knowledge, experience, and total average scores for the PPQ (FPQ) subscales were reported as 35.91 (35.31), 27.19 (26.86), and 63.10 (62.17), respectively. The knowledge, experience, and overall scales of the PPQ (FPQ) were evaluated to provide median scores of 37 (36), 28 (25), and 65 (62) correspondingly. A t-test was used to determine the significance of the observed average differences (d) for knowledge (0.602), experience (0.333), and overall (0.935). The results showed that there were no significant differences (P > 0.05). An inverse relationship was elicited between the total QOL and the pain assessment scores of FCGs, as well as the age of the patient. The difference was, however, majorly statistically non-significant (P > 0.5). Further, statistical significance was found only between the burden component of the CQOLC and the age of the patients (P = 0.034), as well as total pain knowledge (P = 0.007) and total pain scores (P = 0.001) of the FCGs’. As per our analysis, FCGs had less knowledge and experience of patients’ pain, though statistically , it was not significant. The age of the patient, as well as total pain knowledge and total pain scores of the FCGs’ were found to affect the QOL of FCGs’. Studies with large sample sizes might help in strengthening the findings.
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
Indian Journal of Palliative Care
Indian Journal of Palliative Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Welcome to the website of the Indian Journal of Palliative Care. You have free full text access to recent issues of the journal. The links connect you to •guidelines and systematic reviews in palliative care and oncology •a directory of palliative care programmes in India and IAPC membership •Palliative Care Formulary, book reviews and other educational material •guidance on statistical tests and medical writing.
×
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