References

r-n-j

Российский неврологический журнал

Russian neurological journal

2658-79472686-7192

МИА

10.30629/2658-7947-2020-25-3-11-16

r-n-j-82

Research Article

ОБЗОРЫ

REVIEWS

Оценка качества жизни у лиц, перенесших инсульт

Measuring Quality of Life in Stroke Survivors

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9898-3962

Цалта-Младенов

М.

Tsalta-Mladenov

Цалта-Младенов Михаил Эмилов — доктор медицинских наук

Варна

Mihael Emilov Tsalta-Mladenov — MD

Varna

MihaelTsalta@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9071-2340

Георгиева

Д.

Georgieva

Георгиева Дарина Кирилова

Варна

Varna

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1156-9724

Андонова

С.

Andonova

Андонова Сильва Петева

Варна

Varna

Медицинский университет «Проф. Параскев Стоянов»; Вторая клиника неврологии с отделением интенсивной терапии и острых нарушений мозгового кровообращения, университетская многопрофильная больница активного лечения «Св. Марина»БолгарияMedical University “Prof. Dr. Paraskev Stoyanov”; Second Clinic of Neurology with ICU and Stroke Unit, University Multiprofile Hospital for Active Treatment “St. Marina”Bulgaria

2020

14082020

2531116

2020

Цалта-Младенов М., Георгиева Д., Андонова С.

Tsalta-Mladenov M., Georgieva D., Andonova S.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://www.r-n-j.com/jour/article/view/82

Введение. Число пациентов, живущих с последствиями инсульта, растет во всем мире из-за совершенствования методов лечения инсульта, в том числе тромболизиса и тромбэктомии. Вследствие этого возник высокий интерес к оценке качества жизни (КЖ) пациентов, перенесших инсульт. Цели. КЖ пациентов, перенесших инсульт, можно оценить с помощью различных универсальных и специализированных опросников. Любая методика должна оценивать различные сферы здоровья, такие как физическая активность, общение, повседневная деятельность и другие. В данной статье описаны наиболее часто используемые шкалы для оценки КЖ пациентов, перенесших инсульт. Методы. Авторы провели поиск в электронных базах данных PubMed по ключевым словам «качество жизни», «инсульт», «оценка» за период с января 2000 г. по май 2020 г. Результаты. Существуют различные универсальные и специализированные шкалы для оценки качества жизни. К преимуществам специализированных шкал относятся высокая точность и детализация информации по оцениваемым показателям. Ограничения обусловлены большим количеством пунктов, длительным временем проведения оценки и выраженной зависимостью от комплаентности пациента. Универсальные шкалы дают возможность сравнивать КЖ у пациентов с различными заболеваниями. Недостатком является отсутствие подробной информации о состоянии здоровья при определенных заболеваниях или состояниях. Заключение. Оценка различных аспектов КЖ у пациентов, перенесших инсульт, является эффективным инструментом выявления и дальнейшей проработки наиболее пострадавших сторон. Для решения существующих проблем можно рассмотреть возможность сочетанного применения универсальных и специализированных опросников при инсульте. При выборе оценочных шкал следует учитывать возможность длительных и повторных обследований.

Introduction: The number of patients living with the consequences of stroke is increasing worldwide due to the improving stroke care and the modern differentiated treatment options for ischemic stroke – thrombolysis and thrombectomy. Hence, a significant interest has arisen in quality of life (QOL) measurement in post-stroke patients. Objectives. Measuring QOL in stroke survivors can be achieved by using various generic and stroke specific questionnaires. All tools should assess different domains of health such as physical acting, communication, daily activities and others. This article describes the most commonly used scales for measuring post-stroke QOL. Methods. We searched the PubMed electronic databases with the keywords — Quality of life, Stroke, Measuring for the period from January 2000 to May 2020. Results. Various generic and specific scales for quality of life measuring are available. The advantages of the specific scales include high accuracy and detailed information for the assessed domains. The limitations are due to numerous items, long evaluation time and high dependency on patient’s compliance. The generic scales give the ability to compare the QOL in patients with different diseases. The disadvantage is lack of detailed information for the health status in certain disease or condition. Conclusion. Measuring the different aspects of QOL in post-stroke patients is powerful tool in order to focus the further efforts to the most affected domains. A combination between generic and stroke-specific measure might be considered in order to overcome the limitations. The choice of measuring scales must be balanced in the terms of lengthy and repetitive surveys.

качество жизниинсультоценкашкалыобзор

quality of lifestrokemeasurementscalesreview

References1

Katan M, Luft A. Global Burden of Stroke. Seminars in neurology. 2018;38(2):208–11.

Feigin VL, Krishnamurthi RV, Parmar P, Norrving B, Mensah GA, Bennett D.A. et al. Update on the Global Burden of Ischemic and Hemorrhagic Stroke in 1990–2013: The GBD 2013 Study. Neuroepidemiology. 2015;45(3):161–76.

Velarde-Jurado E, Ávila-Figueroa C. Methods for quality of life assessment. Salud Pública de México. 2002;44(4):349–61.

Gorelick PB. The global burden of stroke: persistent and disabling. The Lancet Neurology. 2019;18(5):417–8.

World Health Organization (WHO). The first ten years of the World Health Organization. 1958.

World Health Organization (WHO). Health promotion: a discussion document on the concept and principles: summary report of the Working Group on Concept and Principles of Health Promotion, Copenhagen, 9–13 July 1984. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 1984.

The WHO-QOL Group. Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychological medicine. 1998;28(3):551–8.

Lam CLK. Subjective Quality of Life Measures — General Principles and Concepts. In: Preedy VR, Watson RR, editors. Handbook of Disease Burdens and Quality of Life Measures. New York, NY: Springer New York. 2010:381–99.

Salter KL, Moses MB, Foley NC, Teasell RW. Health-related quality of life after stroke: what are we measuring? International journal of rehabilitation research Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung Revue internationale de recherches de readaptation. 2008;31(2):111–7.

Левтерова Б. Качество на живот при хронични неинфекциозни болести. Научни трудове на Съюза на ученитеПловдив. Серия Г: Медицина, фармация и дентална медицина. 2017;20:63–6. [Levterova B. Quality of life in chronic non-communicable diseases. Scientific works of the Union of Scientists-Plovdiv. Series D: Medicine, pharmacy and dentistry. 2017;20:63–6 (in Bulgarian)].

Bogousslavsky J. Long-Term Effects of Stroke. 1st Edition ed: Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2002.

Carod-Artal FJ, Egido JA. Quality of life after stroke: the importance of a good recovery. Cerebrovascular diseases (Basel, Switzerland). 2009;27 Suppl. 1:204–14.

Donkor ES. Stroke in the 21(st) Century: A Snapshot of the Burden, Epidemiology, and Quality of Life. Stroke research and treatment. 2018:3238165.

Guyatt GH, King DR, Feeny DH, Stubbing D, Goldstein RS. Generic and specific measurement of health-related quality of life in a clinical trial of respiratory rehabilitation. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 1999;52(3):187–92.

Oh S-J, Ku JH. Is a Generic Quality of Life Instrument Helpful for Evaluating Women with Urinary Incontinence? Quality of Life Research. 2006;15(3):493–501.

Williams LS, Weinberger M, Harris LE, Clark DO, Biller J. Development of a stroke-specific quality of life scale. Stroke. 1999;30(7):1362–9.

Abubakar SA, Isezuo SA. Health related quality of life of stroke survivors: experience of a stroke unit. International journal of biomedical science: IJBS. 2012;8(3):183–7.

McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Quality of life research: an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation. 1995;4(4):293–307.

Hyland ME. A brief guide to the selection of quality of life instrument. Health and quality of life outcomes. 2003;1:24–29.

Coons S, Rao S, Keininger D, Hays R. A Comparative Review of Generic Quality-of-Life Instruments. PharmacoEconomics. 2000;17:13–35.

Anderson C, Laubscher S, Burns R. Validation of the Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey questionnaire among stroke patients. Stroke. 1996;27(10):1812–6.

Kazis LE, Lee A, Spiro A, 3rd, Rogers W, Ren XS, Miller DR, et al. Measurement comparisons of the medical outcomes study and veterans SF-36 health survey. Health Care Financ Rev. 2004;25(4):43–58.

Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD, Kosinski M, Keller S, Ware J et al. SF-36 physical and mental health summary scales: a user’s manual. 1994.

Gillen G. Cognitive and Perceptual Rehabilitation. Cognitive and Perceptual Rehabilitation. 2009.

Pickard AS, Johnson JA, Penn A, Lau F, Noseworthy T. Replicability of SF-36 summary scores by the SF-12 in stroke patients. Stroke. 1999;30(6):1213–7.

Group E. EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of healthrelated quality of life. Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 1990;16(3):199–208.

Gusi N, Olivares P, Rajendram R. The EQ-5D Health-Related Quality of Life Questionnaire. 201:87–99.

Fermont JM, Blazeby JM, Rogers CA, Wordsworth S, on behalf of the By-Band-Sleeve Study Management G. The EQ-5D-5L is a valid approach to measure health related quality of life in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. PLOS ONE. 2017;12(12):e0189190.

Dorman P, Slattery J, Farrell B, Dennis M, Sandercock P. Qualitative comparison of the reliability of health status assessments with the EuroQol and SF-36 questionnaires after stroke. United Kingdom Collaborators in the International Stroke Trial. Stroke. 1998;29(1):63–8.

Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, Gilson BS. The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Medical care. 1981;19(8):787–805.

van Straten A, de Haan RJ, Limburg M, van den Bos GA. Clinical meaning of the Stroke-Adapted Sickness Impact Profile-30 and the Sickness Impact Profile-136. Stroke. 2000;31(11):2610–5.

Busija L, Pausenberger E, Haines TP, Haymes S, Buchbinder R, Osborne RH. Adult measures of general health and healthrelated quality of life: Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36- Item (SF-36) and Short Form 12-Item (SF-12) Health Surveys, Nottingham Health Profile (NHP), Sickness Impact Profile (SIP), Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 6D (SF-6D), Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3), Quality of Well-Being Scale (QWB), and Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL). Arthritis care & research. 2011;63 Suppl 11:S383–412.

Boger EJ, Demain S, Latter S. Self-management: a systematic review of outcome measures adopted in self-management interventions for stroke. Disability and rehabilitation. 2013;35(17):1415–28.

Carod-Artal FJ, Egido JA. Quality of Life after Stroke: The Importance of a Good Recovery. Cerebrovascular Diseases. 2009;27(Suppl. 1):204–14.

Huang Y-H, Wu C-Y, Lin K-C, Hsieh Y-W, Snow WM, Wang T-N. Determinants of change in stroke-specific quality of life after distributed constraint-induced therapy. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 2013;67(1):54–63.

Teixeira-Salmela LF, Neto MG, Magalhães LC, Lima RC, Faria CD. Content comparisons of stroke-specific quality of life based upon the international classification of functioning, disability, and health. Quality of life research: an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation. 2009;18(6):765–73.

Lin K-C, Fu T, Wu C-Y, Hsieh C-J. Assessing the stroke-specific quality of life for outcome measurement in stroke rehabilitation: minimal detectable change and clinically important difference. Health and quality of life outcomes. 2011;9:5–9.

Pedersen SG, Heiberg GA, Nielsen JF, Friborg O, Stabel HH, Anke A et al. Validity, reliability and Norwegian adaptation of the Stroke-Specific Quality of Life (SS-QOL) scale. SAGE open medicine. 2018;6:2050312117752031.

Wong GK, Lam SW, Ngai K, Wong A, Poon WS, Mok V. Validation of the Stroke-specific Quality of Life for patients after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and proposed summary subscores. Journal of the neurological sciences. 2012;320(1– 2):97–101.

Ramos-Lima MJM, Brasileiro IdC, Lima TLd, BragaNeto P. Quality of life after stroke: impact of clinical and sociodemographic factors. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2018;73:e418-e.

Duncan PW, Bode RK, Lai SM, Perera S, Investigators GAiNA. Rasch analysis of a new stroke-specific outcome scale: the Stroke Impact Scale. Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation. 2003;84(7):950–63.

Lai SM, Studenski S, Duncan PW, Perera S. Persisting consequences of stroke measured by the Stroke Impact Scale. Stroke. 2002;33(7):1840–4.

Richardson M, Campbell N, Allen L, Meyer M, Teasell R. The stroke impact scale: performance as a quality of life measure in a community-based stroke rehabilitation setting. Disability and rehabilitation. 2016;38(14):1425–30.

Lin K-C, Fu T, Wu C-Y, Hsieh Y-W, Chen C, Lee P-C. Psychometric comparisons of the Stroke Impact Scale 3.0 and Stroke-Specific Quality of Life Scale. Quality of life research: an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation. 2010;19:435–43.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.