Radiation Oncology Journal

The Korean Society for Radiation Oncology (대한방사선종양학회)
권호 표지

Analyses of the Studies on Cancer-Related Quality of Life Published in Korea

암 환자 삶의 질에 대한 국내 연구논문 분석

  • Lee Eun-Hyun (Department of Prevention and Public Medicine, Ajou University, School of Medicine) ;
  • Park Hee Boong (Department of General Surgery, Ajou University, School of Medicine) ;
  • Kim Myung Wook (Department of General Surgery, Ajou University, School of Medicine) ;
  • Kang Sunghee (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ajou University, School of Medicine) ;
  • Lee Hye-Jin (Graduate School of Nursing, Yonsei University) ;
  • Lee Won-Hee (Department of Adult Nursing at Yonsei University) ;
  • Chun Mison (Department of Radiation Oncology, Ajou University, School of Medicine)
  • 이은현 (아주대학교 의과대학 예방의학교실) ;
  • 박희붕 (아주대학교 의과대학 일반외과학교실) ;
  • 김명욱 (아주대학교 의과대학 일반외과학교실) ;
  • 강승희 (아주대학교 의과대학 치료방사선과학교실) ;
  • 이혜진 (연세대학교 간호대학) ;
  • 이원희 (연세대학교 간호대학 성인간호학교실) ;
  • 전미선 (아주대학교 의과대학 치료방사선과학교실)
  • Published : 2002.12.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose : The purpose of the present study was to analyze and evaluate prior studies published in Korea on the cancer-related quality of life, in order to make recommendations for further research. Materials and Methods : A total of 31 studies were selected from three different databases. The selected studies were analyzed according to 11 criteria, such as site of cancer, domain, independent variable, research design, self/proxy rating, single/battery instrument, translation/back translation, reliability, validity, scoring, and findings. Results : Of the 31 studies, approximately half of them were conducted using a mixed cancer group of patients. Many of the studies asserted that the concept of quality of life had a multidimensional attribute. Approximately 30% were longitudinal design studies giving information about the changes in quality of life. In all studies, except one, patients directly rated their level of quality of life. With respect to the questionnaires used for measuring the quality of life, most studies did not consider whether or not their reliability and validity had been established. In addition, when using questionnaires developed in other languages, no studies employed a translation/ back-translation technique. All studies used sum or total scoring methods when calculating the level of quality of life. The types of variables tested for their influence on qualify of life were quite limited. Conclusion : It is recommended that longitudinal design studies be peformed, using methods of data collection whose validity and reliability has been confirmed, and that studies be conducted to identify new variables having an influence on the quality of life.

목적 : 본 연구 목적은 암 환자의 삶의 질에 대한 국내 연구논문을 분석 평가하여 선행연구의 단점을 보완한 후속 연구의 방향을 제시하기 위함이다. 대상 및 방법 : 전남대학교 보건연구 정보센타, KoreaMed 및 의학연구정보센타의 DB Bank를 검색하여 '삶의 질'과 '암'이라는 용어가 포함된 논문 31편을 선정하였다. 선정된 연구논문을 암 부위, 삶의 질 정의에 대한 개념적 영역(domains), 사용된 독립변수(예측변수), 연구설계(단면적/종적연구), 측정의 주체(자가측정/대리측정), 사용된 도구(단일도구/일련의 도구 세트), 질문지 번역과정(번역-역번역), 신뢰도, 타당도, 점수계산방법, 및 연구결과에 따라 분석하였다. 결과 :전체 31편의 연구논문 중 약 반이 여러 종류의 암 환자를 대상으로 실시되었고, 삶의 질의 정의에 대해서는 많은 연구에서 다차원적으로 정의하였다. 연구설계는 약 30%의 논문만이 종적연구설계를 하여 삶의 질 변화에 대한 연구를 하였다. 삶의 질 측정도구로는 거의 전 연구에서 환자가 직접 측정하는 질문지 방법을 이용하였으나, 도구의 선택에 있어 신뢰도와 타당도에 대해서는 고려하지 않은 편이다. 또한 외국에서 개발된 질문지를 번역하여 사용할 때 번역-역번역 과정을 통해 한글로 번역한 도구는 하나도 없었다. 측정된 삶의 질 계산방법은 전부 전통적인 방법인 평균이나 합으로 계산하였다. 연구에서 삶의 질에 영향을 미치는 독립변수로 검정되었던 변수들은 다양하지 않았다. 결론 : 앞으로 암 환자의 삶의 질에 대한 국내 연구가 나아가야 할 방향은 치료과정에 따른 삶의 질 변화 파악을 위한 종적 연구설계의 시도와 신뢰도와 타당도가 수립된 적절한 측정도구의 사용, 그리고 삶의 질에 영향을 미치는 제 변수들에 대한 반복적 연구 및 새로운 변수 파악을 위한 연구라고 할 수 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. Christopher JLM, Alan DL, CoIin DM, CIaudia S. The gIobal burden of disease 2000 project : Aims, methods and data sources. Global programe on evidence for health policy discussion WHO Nov. 2001
  2. U.S. Department of HeaIth and Human Services, PubIic HeaIth Service, NationaI Institutes of HeaIth. Quality of Iife assessment in cancer clinical trials. Report of the Workshop on Quality of Life Research in CIinical Trials. Bethesda, MD. 1990
  3. King C, Haberman M, Berry D, et aI. Quality of life and the cancer experience : The state-of-the-knowledge. Oncol Nurs Forum 1997;24:27-41
  4. Grant MM, Rivera LM (Eds.). Evolution of quality of life in oncology and oncology nursing. In King CR, Hinds PS. Quality of life. Sudbury, Massachusettes : Jones and Bartlett 1998:3-22
  5. Lee EO, Lim NY, Park HA. Nursing/medical research and statical analysis. Seoul : Sumunsa 1998
  6. MeKeon R. Introduction to Aristotle. New York : Modern Library 1947
  7. WorId HeaIth Organization. Chronicle of the World Health Organization, 1, (1/2), 1947:13
  8. CampeII A. The sense of well being in America. New York : McGraw-Hill 1981
  9. Johnson JR, TempIe R. Food and Drug Administration requirements for approval of new anticancer therapies. Cancer Reports 1985;69:1155-1157
  10. Osoba D. Lessons learned from measuring health-related quality of life in oncology. J Clini Oncol 1994;12:608-616
  11. Korean Ministry of HeaIth and WeIfare. Annual report of the Korea central cancer registry program. 2001
  12. Berzon RA. Understanding and using health-related quality of Iife instruments within cIinical research ctudies. In Staquet MJ, Hays RD, Fayers PM (Eds.). Quality of Iife assessment in cIinical traIs (2nd. ed.). NY : Oxford Press. 1999:3-15
  13. Ferrans CE. QuaIity of Iife as an outcome of cancer care. In Yarbro CH, Froggle MH, Goodman M, Groenwald SL (EDs.). Cancer Nursing : Principles and practice (5th ed.). Sudbury, Massachusetts : Jones and Bartlett 2000;243-258
  14. CeIIa DF, TuIsky DS, Gray G. The functional assessment of cancer therapy scale : Development and validation of the general measure. J Clini Oncol 1993;11:570-579
  15. CeIIa DF, TuIsky DS. QuaIity of Iife in cancer : definition, purpose, and methods of measurement. Cancer Invest 1993;327-336
  16. Ferrans CE. Development of a quality of Iife index for patients with cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 1990;17(3, Suppl):15-21
  17. FerreII BR, Dow KH, Grant M. Measurement of the quality of life in cancer survivos. Qual Life Res 1995;4:523-531 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00634747
  18. CeIIa DF. QuaIity of Iife : Concepts and definition. Journal Pain Symptom Manage 1994;9:186-192 https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-3924(94)90129-5
  19. PearIman R, UhImann R. Quality of life in chronic disease : perceptions of elderly patients. J Gerontol 1988;43(2):25-30
  20. Shumaker SA, Anderson RT, Czajkowski SM. Pstchological tests and scales. In SpiIker B (Ed.). Quality of life assessment in cIinical trials. New Yotk : Raven press 1990;95-113
  21. SpiIker B. Introduction. In SpiIker B (Ed.). Quality Iite assessment in cIinical triaIs. New York : Raven press 1990;3-9
  22. Ware J, Sherbourne C. The MOS Short-form General Health Survey (SF-36). Med Care 1992;30:473-483 https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002
  23. Bergner M. Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, GiIson BS. The sickness impact profile; Development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 1981;19:787-806
  24. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et aI. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL-V30 : A quality-of-Iife instrument for use in international trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:365-376 https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/85.5.365
  25. MeIzack R. The McGiII Pain Questionnaire : Major properties and scoring methods. Pain 1975;1:277-299 https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(75)90044-5
  26. Ro YJ. Study on quality of Iife of middle aged adults dwelling in Seoul. Doctoral dissertation : Yonsei University 1988
  27. Warnecke RB, Ferrans CE, Johnson TP. Measuring quality of life in cuIturally diverse populations. Journal of National Cancer Inst Monogr 1996;20:29-38
  28. Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality of life instruments : Attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res 2002;11:193-205
  29. GiII TM, Feinstein AR. A critical appraisal of the quality of quality-of-Iife measurements. JAMA 1994;27(2):619-626
  30. FerreII BR. Development of a quality of Iife index for patients with cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum (suppl.) 1990;17(3):21-23
  31. Trauer T, Mackinnon A. Why are we weighting? The role of important rating in quality of Iife measurement. Qual Life Res 2001;10:579-585 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013159414364