Psychological well-being outcomes in disease-free survivors of mid-low rectal cancer following curative surgery

Department of Oncological and Surgical Sciences, Clinica Chirurgica II, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
Psycho-Oncology (Impact Factor: 2.44). 07/2011; 20(7):706-14. DOI: 10.1002/pon.1763
Source: PubMed


The aim of this cross-sectional study was to evaluate psychological well-being outcomes in disease-free survivors who previously underwent radical surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma.
All patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent primary surgery at a single institution from 1990 to 2002 were considered for inclusion in the study. We identified and sent questionnaires to 145 patients after excluding those who had died or had recurrent disease. One hundred and seventeen patients (men/women: 74/43; median age: 65 years) returned the questionnaires. Patients' well being was evaluated using the Psychological General Well-Being Index (PGWBI) questionnaire. The mean PGWBI score was compared with normative data of the general population. The impact of patient-, tumor- and treatment-related factors on patients' long-term psychological well-being status was also evaluated.
Compared with the general population, study patients had significantly better anxiety, depressed mood, positive well being, general health, vitality scales and global index scores. On multivariate analysis, positive well being was independently affected by time from diagnosis (36 months; p=0.025) and occurrence of early major complications (p=0.024). Variables that were independently associated with worse self-control included primary education (p=0.04) and the presence of fecal urgency (p=0.049). General health was negatively affected by time from diagnosis (36 months; p=0.047) and fecal urgency (p=0.009).
Patients who have survived cancer are likely to re-evaluate the importance of everyday events and this may explain why they had better PGWBI scores. This study also identified that a short time from diagnosis, early adverse events and bowel dysfunction had a negative impact on patients' well being.

4 Reads
  • Source
    • "Higher scores indicate better health. The six scales can be further summed to provide a global index score representing one comprehensive subjective well-being ranging from 0 to 110 [19]. A global score <60 suggests a severe distress; from 60 to 72 suggests a moderate distress; and >72 suggests a positive well-being. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sleep-disordered breathing adversely affects daytime alertness and cognition. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients have several typical symptoms including habitual snoring, excessive daytime sleepiness, fatigue, lack of concentration, memory impairment, and at times psychological disturbances. We evaluated different aspects in the health related quality of life (HRQoL) in subjects referred to our sleep laboratory for their first examination for suspicion of OSA. One hundred ninety-eight consecutive outpatients (152 M) (mean age 52.7 +/- 12.8 years, range 18-82 years; mean BMI 31.0 +/- 6.5 kg/m2, range 17.3-57.8 kg/m2) were evaluated with two self-reported questionnaires for HRQoL assessment: Psychological General Well-Being Index (PGWBI), that asses anxiety, depressed mood, positive well-being, self-control, general health, vitality, and 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12), consisting in Physical and Mental Component Summaries (PCS and MCS). Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) was used to assess daytime sleepiness before nocturnal diagnostic examination. Subjects showed variable HRQoL scores. HRQoL was worse in women than men and it decreased with age. No relation was found with AHI severity (range 0-129 n/h). BMI and TSat90 (range 0-87.9%) affected physical health perception (SF-12 PCS). Furthermore TSat90 influenced PGWBI Vitality subscale. Subjects with ESS > 10 showed a worse HRQoL profile (p < 0.001) in SF-12 and in PGWBI. Multiple regression analysis showed that age, BMI and ESS were significant predictors of SF-12 PCS (p < 0.001; r2 = 0.23). A worse HRQoL perception among subjects referred for OSA suspicion was not related to disease severity. BMI and hypoxemia influenced only some HRQoL dimensions, while excessive daytime sleepiness worsens all HRQoL components considered.
    Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 12/2013; 11(1):207. DOI:10.1186/1477-7525-11-207 · 2.12 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and aim The literature continues to emphasize the advantages of treating patients in “high volume” units by “expert” surgeons, but there is no agreed definition of what is meant by either term. In September 2012, a Consensus Conference on Clinical Competence was organized in Rome as part of the meeting of the National Congress of Italian Surgery (I Congresso Nazionale della Chirurgia Italiana: Unità e valore della chirurgia italiana). The aims were to provide a definition of “expert surgeon” and “high-volume facility” in rectal cancer surgery and to assess their influence on patient outcome. Method An Organizing Committee (OC), a Scientific Committee (SC), a Group of Experts (E) and a Panel/Jury (P) were set up for the conduct of the Consensus Conference. Review of the literature focused on three main questions including training, “measuring” of quality and to what extent hospital and surgeon volume affects sphincter-preserving procedures, local recurrence, 30-day morbidity and mortality, survival, function, choice of laparoscopic approach and the choice of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM). Results and conclusion The difficulties encountered in defining competence in rectal surgery arise from the great heterogeneity of the parameters described in the literature to quantify it. Acquisition of data is difficult as many articles were published many years ago. Even with a focus on surgeon and hospital volume, it is difficult to define their role owing to the variability and the quality of the relevant studies.
    International Journal of Colorectal Disease 07/2014; 29(7). DOI:10.1007/s00384-014-1887-x · 2.45 Impact Factor
  • International Journal of Colorectal Disease 08/2014; 29(8):1029-1029. DOI:10.1007/s00384-014-1913-z · 2.45 Impact Factor