Clinical Geriatrics - Original Investigations
Published: 2021-10-31

Pain management, activities of daily living and the assessment of the WHOQOL-OLD module: results of a cross-sectional analysis of a cohort of older men with oncological diagnoses

CHANGE Research Working Group, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Carrera de Medicina Humana, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Perú
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3904-7514
CHANGE Research Working Group, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Carrera de Medicina Humana, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Perú
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3936-0295
CHANGE Research Working Group, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Carrera de Medicina Humana, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Perú; Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Facultad de Medicina Humana, Centro de Investigación del Envejecimiento (CIEN), Lima, Perú; Bamboo Seniors Health Services, Lima, Perú
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4045-0260
Department of Geriatric Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7640-6176
Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Facultad de Medicina Humana, Centro de Investigación del Envejecimiento (CIEN), Lima, Perú; Bamboo Seniors Health Services, Lima, Perú
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0336-0584
pain pain management quality of life aged cancer Peru (Source: MeSH NLM)

Abstract

Cancer represents a major public health problem worldwide, especially in the older adult population which is increasing rapidly. Previous studies show that the majority of older adults with cancer report poor health-related quality of life (QoL) and that up to 90% of patients with metastases or terminal stage disease complain of pain at some point. Nevertheless, the impact of pain and disability on highly important aspects of older adults’ health, such as intimacy or the perception of autonomy, has been scarcely studied. This cross-sectional study aimed to identify the association between poor pain management and disability for activities of daily living (ADL) and 6 aspects of older adults’ health assessed by a short version of the WHOQOL-OLD module in 891 older male patients with a newly diagnosed malignant neoplasm. The mean age of the participants was 79.1 years (SD 3.2) and the most frequent tumor location was the prostate. In the adjusted analyses, the raw total score of the WHOQOL-OLD module decreased by 7.43 in patients with ADL disability and by 9.44 points in patients with poor pain management. Comprehensive and adequate diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to pain and disability are recommended in older adults with cancer to improve health-related QoL and impact aspects of health such as those assessed by the WHOQOL-OLD.

INTRODUCTION

Cancer represents a major public health problem worldwide, especially due to its social and personal costs 1. The impact of cancer on health-related quality of life (QoL) has been largely studied and is demonstrated by physical signs associated with disease progression 2-5, the psychological consequences of symptoms 6-9, restriction of social life and social roles, and the high cost of current treatment strategies 10-13.

Nonetheless, QoL is not a simple concept to define or to quantify as it includes many aspects and at its core it is a subjective experience. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines QoL as an “individual’s perception of their position in life in the context of the culture and value systems in which they live in relation to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns” 14. Other definitions conceptualize QoL as a deviation between the individual’s present experience and their expectations 15. Since expectations are likely formed from previous experience, changes associated with a specific diagnosis, such as cancer, and its progression, such as incident disability, diminish QoL 16. Additionally, tools for QoL assessment vary in terms of conceptual foundations, dimensions, indicators, and units of analysis. Nevertheless, most assessment tools include indicators that pertain to physical and mental health in an attempt to convey well-being, either through a composite index or through unaggregated dimensions and indicators.

Globally, the number of older adults is increasing rapidly, with most of this increase taking place in developing countries 17. Aging can be associated with a greater burden of comorbidity; for example, in many regions, older adults account for over half of all cancer cases, and a larger proportion of cancer mortality 18. Previous studies have shown that the majority of older adults with cancer report poor QoL and that up to 90% of patients with metastases or terminal stage disease complain of pain at some point 19. Cancer pain is associated with psychological disturbances, such as depression, emotional distress, anxiety, irritability, fear, and inattention, all of which may impact QoL 20,21. When uncontrolled or severe, pain has been described to lead to social isolation, fatigue, and physical and emotional distress 22.

However, the tools most frequently used for assessment of health-related QoL do not consider several domains that may be more relevant in the older adult population. Recently, specific tools such as the World Health Organization Quality of life – Age (WHOQOL-AGE) questionnaire 23, a composite index; and the WHOQOL-OLD scale 24,25, a tool assessing 6 aspects of older adults’ health, that completes the WHOQoL-100 and the WHOQoL-Bref, have been developed to better evaluate health-related QoL in older adults. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the association between self-reported poor pain management and disability for activities of daily living (ADL) and a short version of the WHOQOL-OLD module in older Peruvian men with cancer.

METHODS

DESIGN

Cross-sectional analysis of a prospective cohort 26.

STUDY POPULATION

We performed a cross-sectional analysis of a prospective cohort of male navy veterans ≥ 60 years with a newly confirmed cancer diagnosis, treated in a third level, university-affiliated hospital in Callao (Peru) between January 2013 and January 2015.

ELIGIBILITY

Men 3 60 years with a new cancer diagnosis and full coverage of health insurance for the treatment of oncological diseases were eligible for inclusion. We only included men since treatments could differ from women’s because men from Navy had total health coverage. The exclusion criteria were as follows: a past medical history of dementia; Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score < 24, planned oncological treatment with no curative intent, untaken or suspended oncological treatment, and missing data.

A total of 1178 potentially eligible patients were approached to participate in the study and provide informed consent during a scheduled oncology visit; 287 patients were excluded, and 891 participated in the study. All the patients invited accepted to participate and signed informed consent. Recruitment took place between September 2012 and February 2013. The mean follow-up was 10.25 months. The research protocol was approved by the Institutional Committee of Research Ethics of the Universidad Científica del Sur (Lima, Peru, register code: 027-2019-PRO99).

PROCEDURES

One month after recruitment, clinical assessment was carried out by two geriatricians. The evaluation included sociodemographic characteristics, functional and frailty status, vulnerability, cognitive status, anthropometry, and oncological clinical evolution. Thereafter, every 8 weeks, clinical files were reviewed to establish the presence of treatment-related adverse effects.

MEASURES

Dependent variables

Older adults’ health: short version of the WHOQOL-OLD

Six facets of older adults’ health were assessed using a brief version of the WHOQOL-OLD, previously validated for use in Spanish. This tool has shown good internal consistency and criterion validity as a whole 25. It is composed of six questions (Tab. I), assessing future activities, death and dying, autonomy, past activities, sensory abilities, and intimacy. Questions were answered using a 5-point Likert scale with a total raw score ranging from 0-30. There is no established cut-off, however, the higher the score the better the health-status associated with the aspects investigated.

Independent variables

Self-reported poorly managed pain

A negative answer to the question “Currently, is your pain well-controlled?” defined poorly controlled pain 27.

ADL disability

ADL disability was evaluated using the Barthel Index. This index assesses the ability to independently perform the following activities: feeding, bathing, grooming, dressing, bowel control, bladder control, toilet use, transfers (bed to chair and back), mobility on level surfaces, and stairs. The total score ranges from 0 to 100. A score of 100 defines independence for ADL; 60-95, mild disability; 40-55, moderate disability; and 20-35, severe disability 28,29. For the bivariate analysis, ADL disability was defined as a score ≤ 95 in the Barthel index.

Covariates

Covariates included age (in years) and comorbidity. The presence of 10 chronic pathologic entities was summed up in a score ranging from 0 to 10, in which higher scores indicated more chronic disease [hypertension, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, type 2 diabetes mellitus, history of another cancer, hypoalbuminemia (albumin ≤ 3.5 g/dl), depressive symptoms (≥ 3 in the 5-item Geriatric Depression Scale) 30, self-reported urinary incontinence assessed with one item of the Edmonton Frail Scale (EFS) 31, overweight (body mass index, BMI, ≥25 kg/m2) or obesity (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2), self-reported hearing impairment and visual impairment]. Smoking history, history of ≥ 1 fall in the previous year, and polypharmacy (≥ 3 drugs) 32 were also registered.

Frailty was assessed using a modified version of the phenotype described by Fried et al. 26, maintaining the original five components but varying the metrics slightly. Shrinking was present if the answer to the following question from the EFS was positive: have you recently lost weight such that your clothing has become looser? Grip strength < 27 kg (Camry Dynamometer, series 120,286) identified the presence of weakness. Exhaustion was defined as a positive answer to either of the following first two statements from the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale 33: “I felt that everything I did was an effort”, “I could not get going”, or a negative response to the question “Do you feel full of energy?” from the 15-item Geriatric Depression Scale 34. Patients were also asked, “How often in the last week did you feel this way?”, and the available responses were: 0 = rarely or none of the time (< 1 day), 1 = some or a little of the time (1-2 days), 2 = a moderate amount of the time (3-4 days), or 3 = most of the time. Participants that answered “2” or “3” to either of the questions were categorized as “frail” according to the exhaustion criterion. Slowness was defined as a 4-meter gait speed test < 0.8 m/s as proposed by the revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis of sarcopenia 35. Lastly, participants in the lowest 20% of the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly were considered frail for the low activity criterion 36. Participants were classified as frail if they had ≥ 3 of the above-described components.

Pain severity was assessed using the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), which ranges from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain) 37.

Cognitive impairment was identified with a cut-off score of 26 in the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test (MoCA) 38. This screening tool is composed of 30 items with a total score ranging from 0-30; a score of 25 or less indicates impairment. The MoCA has shown good sensitivity and specificity for dementia 39.

The Lawton-Brody scale was used to identify disability for instrumental ADL (IADL). This scale assesses the ability of the individual to independently use the telephone, go shopping, prepare food, do housekeeping, do the laundry, use transportation, handle medications, and manage finances. Scores range from 0 to 8; the lower the score, the greater the disability for IADL 40. Two screening tools were used to identify vulnerability: The Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 (VES-13) and the G8 tool 41,42. The VES-13 includes 13 items assessing physical and functional status, age, and self-perceived health; a score ≥ 3 defined vulnerability. The G8 assesses weight loss, food consumption, mobility, and polypharmacy, among other domains; a score ≤ 14 also defined vulnerability.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Variables are described using frequencies and proportions, means, and standard deviations (SD) or medians and interquartile ranges (IQR) when appropriate. For comparisons between groups, Chi-square tests, Student’s T-tests, or their non-parametric counterparts were used depending on the nature of the variable. To determine the association between poor pain management and ADL disability with the short form of the WHOQOL-OLD module, a stepwise linear regression analysis was conducted. Variables that were significant in correlational analyses with a p-value < .05 were entered into the models. Only the variables significantly associated with the WHOQOL-OLD score at the 0.05 level were retained. We did not consider the Lawton index and other variables in the multivariate analysis in order to avoid over-adjustment because the VES-13 confounder has similar items. Data was analyzed using STATA v.15.0 (College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC).

RESULTS

The mean age of the participants was 79.1 ± 3.2 years. ADL disability and poor pain management were present in 51.18 and 26.82%, respectively. The mean number of comorbidities was 6.2 ± 1.3, and the most frequent tumor location and treatment were prostate and radiation therapy, respectively. About half of the patients (51.74%) had fallen 1 time during the previous year; other geriatric issues were also frequent: polypharmacy (54.77%), frailty (53.65%), and vulnerability (VES-13 = 49.49%, G8 = 48.26%). For participants with ADL disability, the mean raw WHOQOL-OLD module score was 9.8 ± 5.7 while the VAS score was 7.7 ± 1.1. For those with poor pain management, the mean raw WHOQOL-OLD score was 7.9 ± 6.4 while the VAS score was 7.4 ± 1.3.

Table I shows a descriptive analysis of the six domains assessed by the short version of the WHOQOL-OLD. The domains with the highest mean scores were: To what extent do you feel that you have control over your future? (4.06 ± 0.81) and How worried are you about the way you will die? (4.68 ± 0.21).

Participants with ADL disabilities were more likely to be older while those with poor pain management were younger. Comorbidity was greater in participants with ADL disability and poor pain management. Also, all the investigated geriatric issues were more frequent in participants with ADL disability and those with poor pain management. Moreover, the IADL score and the WHOQOL-OLD module total raw score were more likely to be lower in participants with ADL disability and poor pain management (Tab. II).

Multiple linear regression models showed that the short version WHOQOL-OLD module total raw score decreased by a mean of 7.43 points in participants with ADL disability and by 9.44 points in participants with poor pain management (Tab. III). Figure 1 shows the WHOQOL-OLD module total raw score according to different levels of ADL disability.

DISCUSSION

Although previous studies have shown that older adults with cancer have greater ADL disability and poorer QoL (EuroQoLGroup EQ-5D) 43 compared with the general older adult population 44 and that the absence of disability is associated with better functioning on QoL scales (The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires, EORTC QLQ-C30) 45 and lower symptom scores 46, to our knowledge, there is no study aimed at demonstrating that these associations extend to matters of health which are especially important for older adults, such as those assessed by the WHOQOL-OLD module.

Our results show that uncontrolled pain and ADL disability are independently associated with the WHOQOL-OLD raw total score in older men with cancer and highlight possible unmet needs in this population. The WHOQOL-OLD module domains with the highest mean scores (better perception of health-related QoL) in the present study were those regarding death and dying, and future activities. Although qualitative research suggests that most palliative care patients with oncological diagnoses experience fear 47, and about half show denial, more detailed studies on the perception of dying propose that spiritual health efficacy and instrumental efficacy are potent predictors of death fears in older adults 48, leading to a highly individualized perception which may explain our results. The better perception in these domains may also be explained by cultural traits in men in Latin America. In contrast, the lowest mean facet score was for intimacy. In a mixed comparative analysis of groups on end of life needs in terminally ill patients with cancer and older adults > 85 years, Chikhladze et al. 49 described that frequently alluded themes included social relation (belonging), love, esteem, and transcendence, underscoring the importance of promoting the fulfillment of psychological needs, which are higher in the Maslow’s hierarchy 50, in older patients with cancer.

The association between poor pain management and poor health-related QoL has been reported elsewhere 51. Imagama et al. showed that chronic non-cancer pain, such as low back and shoulder pain, significantly decreases health-related QoL assessed by the short form 36 (SF36) 52. Also, Ulas et al. 53 found that oncological patients with neuropathic pain reported significantly higher scores of depression, anxiety, fatigue, and pain intensity in comparison with patients without pain, all of which are related to health-related QoL. In the present study, the WHOQOL-OLD module total raw score decreased by a mean of 9.44 points in men with poor pain management. The effect of poor pain management on the WHOQOL-OLD was independent of geriatric syndromes and comorbidities. These results align with the previously described associations between pain and poor quality of life and extend into the facets assessed by the WHOQOL-OLD module, affecting domains such as future activities, perceptions about death and dying, autonomy, past activities, sensory abilities, and intimacy. Pain is one of the most common and troublesome symptoms affecting patients with cancer 54. However, despite the availability of effective treatments, cancer-related pain is inadequately controlled in up to 50% of patients 55,56. Achieving adequate pain control implies treatment goals such as improving patient comfort, functionality and safety 57, and may lead to improvement of ADL disability and mobility disability as well.

A statistically significant association was also found between ADL disability and the WHOQOL-OLD, with the WHOQOL-OLD total raw score decreasing by a mean of 7.43 points in participants with ADL disability independently of comorbidity and geriatric syndromes. Previous work has shown a relationship between ADL disability and QoL 58,59. In older patients with ADL disability in the context of hip fracture, improvement in functioning, mobility, and social participation through occupational therapy (OT) has demonstrated to improve health-related QoL 60. Whether this phenomenon extends to the facets of the WHOQOL-OLD module is unknown; however, it is likely that at least one of the WHOQOL-OLD domains, autonomy, would benefit from OT.

The association between WHOQOL-OLD, pain and ADL disability may be mediated by the relationship between uncontrolled pain and disability. Chronic pain impacts physical and physiological activities, leading to disability over time. Persistence of pain is what mediates the increase of disability-adjusted life years regarding non-transmittable diseases. In this study, both aging and cancer cause chronic pain, and thus, it is plausible to hypothesize that the latter is a determinant of disability.

LIMITATIONS AND STRENGTHS

This study has several limitations. The population is composed of only male naval veterans, most of whom were receiving treatment for prostatic cancer, and therefore, the conclusions cannot be generalized to other populations or clinical contexts. Also, the only available measurement regarding QoL is the WHOQOL-OLD module, which does not translate into a complete assessment of health-related QoL. Moreover, this was a cross-sectional analysis, which precludes establishing the direction of the associations. However, the sample size is considerable, and the study reports scarcely studied, although potentially modifiable, outcomes in this population.

CONCLUSIONS

Poor pain management and ADL disability are independently associated with the WHOQOL-OLD module in older men with cancer. A dynamic and comprehensive diagnostic and therapeutic approach to pain and disability is recommended since their adequate management has proven to improve different measures of health-related QoL in older adults with and without oncological diagnoses.

Ethical consideration

None.

Acknowledgement

The research protocol was approved by the Institutional Committee of Research Ethics of the Universidad Científica del Sur (Lima, Peru, register code: 027-2019-PRO99).

Funding

This work was funded by the Centro de Investigación del Envejecimiento de la Universidad de San Martín de Porres.

Conflict of interest

None.

Figures and tables

Figure 1.Score of quality of life (WHOQOL-OLD) according to level of impairment in activities of daily living (Barthel Index).

Items Questions Domains Mean ± SD1
1 To what extent do you feel that you have control over your future? Future activities 4.06 ± 0.81
2 How worried are you about the way you will die? Death and dying 4.68 ± 0.21
3 To what extent are you satisfied with your level of activity? Autonomy 3.31 ± 0.9
4 If you look back on your life, how happy are you with the facts you remember? Past activities 3.32 ± 1.1
5 How would you evaluate the functioning of your senses (for example, hearing, vision, taste, smell, touch)? Sensory abilities 3.11 ± 1.2
6 To what extent do you have opportunities to be loved? Intimacy 2.98 ± 0.75
Table I.Descriptive analysis of the WHOQOL-OLD domains of quality of life.
Variables N % Impairment in daily living activities P-value Poor pain management P-value
Yes No Yes No
n = 456 51.18% n = 435 48.82% n = 239 26.82% n = 652 73.18%
Age in years (mean ± SD1) 79.1 ± 3.2 88.1 ± 5.3 76.4 ± 6.4 0.012 79.3 ± 4.4 80.1 ± 4.9 0.12
Comorbidities (mean ± SD1) 6.2 ± 1.3 8.7 ± 1.2 4.4 ± 1.4 0.012 7.4 ± 1.2 5.7 ± 1.4 0.012
History of tobacco consumption 0.13 0.23
Yes 109 12.23 50 10.96 59 13.56 24 10.04 85 13.04
No 782 87.77 406 89.04 376 86.44 215 89.96 567 86.96
Falls in the last year 0.013 0.013
Yes 461 51.74 287 62.94 174 40.00 225 94.14 236 3620
No 430 48.26 169 37.06 261 60.00 14 5.86 416 63.8
Polypharmacy 0.013 0.013
Yes 488 54.77 301 66.01 187 42.99 201 84.1 287 44.02
No 403 45.23 155 33.99 248 57.01 38 15.9 365 55.98
Fried’s frailty phenotype 0.013 0.013
Frail 478 53.65 291 63.82 187 42.99 209 87.45 269 41.26
Non-frail 413 46.35 165 36.18 248 57.01 30 12.55 383 58.74
VES-13 0.013 0.013
Vulnerable 441 49.49 250 54.82 191 43.91 178 74.48 263 40.34
Non-vulnerable 450 50.51 206 45.18 244 56.09 61 25.52 389 59.66
G8 0.233 0.023
Vulnerable 430 48.26 229 50.23 201 46.21 166 69.46 264 40.49
Non-vulnerable 461 51.74 227 49.77 234 53.79 73 30.54 388 59.51
VAS score (mean ± SD1) 4.2 ± 0.5 7.7 ± 1.1 3.9 ± 1.6 0.012 7.4 ± 1.3 4.1 ± 1.6 0.012
MoCA score (mean ± SD1) 26.4 ± 1.1 26.03 ± 2.3 26.7 ± 1.7 0.52 26.7 ± 2.3 26.7 ± 1.9 0.12
Lawton IADL scale (mean ± SD1) 4.4 ± 0.7 2.7 ± 1.4 5.7 ± 1.4 0.012 2.4 ± 1.9 6.4 ± 0.9 0.012
WHOQOL-OLD (six questions)
Mean ± SD1 16.4 ± 5.5 9.8 ± 5.7 22.1 ± 4.6 0.012 7.9 ± 6.4 19.8 ± 9.9 0.012
Median (interquartile range) 15.1 (7.0) 9.2 (6.0) 24.0 (3.0) 0.014 9.7 (7.0) 23.0 (2.0) 0.014
Minimum-maximum score 7-27 - -
Table II.Characteristics of the population and bivariate analysis (n = 891).
Variable Model 11 Model 22 Model 33 Model 44
β Standard error P-value β Standard error P-value β Standard error P-value β Standard error P-value
Quality of life -7.01 6.35 0.001 -7.43 6.42 0.001 -9.67 7.29 0.001 -9.44 6.12 0.04
Table III.Multiple linear regressions to determine the association between quality of life (WHOQOL-OLD), impairment of daily living activities (Barthel Index) and poor pain management (n = 891).

References

  1. Luengo-Fernandez R, Leal J, Gray A. Economic burden of cancer across the European Union: a population-based cost analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2013; 14:1165-1173. DOI
  2. Ahmedzai S. Recent clinical trials of pain control: impact on quality of life. Eur J Canc. 1995; 31:S2-S7. DOI
  3. Rhodes VA, Johnson MH, McDaniel RW. Nausea, vomiting, and retching: the management of the symptom experience. Semin Oncol. 1995; 11:256-265. DOI
  4. Freedman TG. Social and cultural dimensions of hair loss in women treated for breast cancer. Canc Nurs. 1994; 17:334-341.
  5. Winningham M, Nail LM, Burke MB. Fatigue and the cancer experience: the state of knowledge. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1994; 21:23-36.
  6. Kroenke K, Theobald D, Wu J. The association of depression and pain with health-related quality of life, disability, and health care use in cancer patients. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2010; 40:327-341. DOI
  7. Ferrell BR, Dow KH, Leigh S. Quality of life in long-term cancer survivors. Oncol Nurs Forum. 1995; 22:915-920.
  8. Kim Y, Carver CS, Spillers RL. Dyadic effects of fear of recurrence on the quality of life of cancer survivors and their caregivers. Qual Life Res. 2012; 21:517-525. DOI
  9. Boman K, Bodegard G. Psychological long-term coping with experience of disease and treatment in childhood cancer survivors. Acta Paediatrica. 1995; 84:1395-1402. DOI
  10. Zebrack BJ. Cancer survivor identity and quality of life. Canc Pract. 2000; 8:238-242. DOI
  11. Smith TJ, Hillner BE, Desch CE. Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of cancer treatment: rational allocation of resources based on decision analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993; 85:1460-1474. DOI
  12. Northouse LL. The impact of cancer in women on the family. Canc Pract. 1995; 3:134-142.
  13. Greenberg D, Earle C, Fang C. When is cancer care cost-effective? A systematic overview of costutility analyses in Oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 102:82-88. DOI
  14. World Health Organization. Quality of life in social science and medicine the World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): position paper from the World Health Organization. Soc Sci Med. 1995; 41:1403-1409. DOI
  15. Calman K. Quality of life in cancer patients – an hypothesis. J Med Ethics. 1984; 10:124-127. DOI
  16. Morton R. Toward comprehensive multidisciplinary care for head and neck cancer patients: quality of life versus survival. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2012; 147:404-406. DOI
  17. Soto-Perez-de-Celis E, Glas NA, de Hsu T. Global geriatric oncology: achievements and challenges. J Geriatr Oncol. 2017; 8:374-386. DOI
  18. Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Ervik M. GLOBOCAN 2012: estimated cancer incidence, mortality and prevalence worldwide in 2012 v1.0. International Agency for Research on Cancer: Lyon, France; 2013. Publisher Full Text
  19. Costa WA, Monteiro MN, Queiroz JF. Pain and quality of life in breast cancer patients. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2017; 72:758-763. DOI
  20. Donovan KA, Thompson LM, Jacobsen PB. Handbook of pain and palliative care. Springer: New York, NY; 2013.
  21. Baker TA, Krok-Schoen JL, McMillan SC. Identifying factors of psychological distress on the experience of pain and symptom management among cancer patients. BMC Psychol. 2016; 4:52. DOI
  22. Tofthagen CS, McMillan SC. Pain, neuropathic symptoms, and physical and mental well-being in persons with cancer. Cancer Nurs. 2010; 33:436-444. DOI
  23. Caballero F, Miret M, Power M. Validation of an instrument to evaluate quality of life in the aging population: WHOQOL-AGE. Health Qual Life Outcom. 2013; 11:177. DOI
  24. Power M, Quinn K, Schmidt S. Development of the WHOQOL-old module. Qual Life Res. 2005; 14:2197-2214. DOI
  25. Fang J, Power M, Lin Y. Development of short versions for the WHOQOL-OLD Module. Gerontologist. 2012; 52:66-78. DOI
  26. Runzer-Colmenares FM, Urrunaga-Pastor D, Aguirre LG. Frailty and vulnerability as predictors of radiotoxicity in older adults: a longitudinal study in Peru. Med Clínica Engl Ed. 2017; 149:325-330. DOI
  27. Giordano LA, Elliott MN, Goldstein E. Development, implementation, and public reporting of the HCAHPS survey. Med Care Res Rev MCRR. 2010; 67:27-37. DOI
  28. Nakao S, Takata S, Uemura H. Relationship between Barthel Index scores during the acute phase of rehabilitation and subsequent ADL in stroke patients. J Med Invest. 2010; 57:81-88. DOI
  29. Katz for the Association of Rheumatology Health Professionals Outcomes Measures Task Force PP. Measures of adult general functional status: the Barthel index, Katz index of activities of daily living, Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), MACTAR patient preference disability Questionnaire, and Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire (MHAQ). Arthritis Care Res. 2003; 49:S15-S27. DOI
  30. Hoyl M, Alessi C, Harker J. Development and testing of a five – item version of the Geriatric Depression Scale. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1999; 47:873-878. DOI
  31. Rolfson DB, Majumdar SR, Tsuyuki RT. Validity and reliability of the Edmonton frail scale. Age Ageing. 2006; 35:526-529. DOI
  32. Monégat M, Sermet C, Perronnin M. Polypharmacy: definitions, measurement and stakes involved. Inst De Rech Et Doc En Économie De La St. 2014; 204:1-8.
  33. Radloff L. The CES-D scale: a self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Meas. 1977; 1:385-340.
  34. Sheikh JL, Yesavage JA. Clinical gerontology: a guide to assessment and intervention. Hawthorn Press: New York, NY; 1986. DOI
  35. Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Bahat G, Bauer J. Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis. Age Ageing. 2019; 48:16-31. DOI
  36. Washburn RA, Smith KW, Jette AM. The Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE): development and evaluation. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993; 46:153-162. DOI
  37. Hawker GA, Mian S, Kendzerska T. Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011; 63:S240-S252. DOI
  38. Nasreddine ZS, Phillips NA, Bedirian V. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, MoCA: a brief screening tool for mild cognitive impairment. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005; 53:695-699. DOI
  39. Tsoi KK, Chan JY, Hirai HW. Cognitive tests to detect dementia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Intern Med. 2015; 175:1450. DOI
  40. van Abbema D, van Vuuren A, van den Berkmortel F. Functional status decline in older patients with breast and colorectal cancer after cancer treatment: a prospective cohort study. J Geriatr Oncol. 2017; 8:176-184. DOI
  41. Barberger-Gateau P, Commenges D, Gagnon M. Instrumental activities of daily living as a screening tool for cognitive impairment and dementia in elderly community dwellers. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1992; 40:1129-1134. DOI
  42. Delgado C, Araneda A, Behrens MI. Validation of the Spanish-language version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment test in adults older than 60 years. Neurologia. 2019; 34:376-385. DOI
  43. EuroQol Group. EuroQol – a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy Amst Neth. 1990; 16:199-208. DOI
  44. Lee MK. Disability and quality of life in community-dwelling elderly cancer survivors: case-control study in the Korean population. Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2016; 24:22-28. DOI
  45. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1993; 85:365-376. DOI
  46. de Arruda FN, Oonk MHM, Mourits MJE. Determinants of health-related quality of life in elderly ovarian cancer patients: the role of frailty and dependence. Gynecol Oncol. 2019; 153:610-615. DOI
  47. Renz M, Reichmuth O, Bueche D. Fear, pain, denial, and spiritual experiences in dying processes. Am J Hosp Palliat Med. 2018; 35:478-491. DOI
  48. Fry PS. Perceived self-efficacy domains as predictors of fear of the unknown and fear of dying among older adults. Psychol Aging. 2003; 18:474-486. DOI
  49. Chikhladze N, Tebidze N, Chabukiani T. The attitudes, needs, and requirements at end of life in the Republic of Georgia (comparative analysis of groups of patients with cancer and elders). J Palliat Care. 2018; 33:252-259. DOI
  50. Goble FG. The third force: the psychology of Abraham Maslow. Grossman: Oxford, England; 2004.
  51. Lema MJ, Foley KM, Hausheer FH. Types and epidemiology of cancer-related neuropathic pain: the intersection of cancer pain and neuropathic pain. Oncologist. 2010; 15:3-8. DOI
  52. Imagama S, Ando K, Kobayashi K. Shoulder pain has most impact on poor quality of life among various types of musculoskeletal pain in middle-aged and elderly people: Yakumo study. Mod Rheumatol. 2019;1-5. DOI
  53. Ulas S, Eyigor S, Caramat I. Quality of life and neuropathic pain in hospitalized cancer patients: a comparative analysis of patients in palliative care wards versus those in general wards. Indian J Palliat Care. 2018; 24:325-333. DOI
  54. van den Beuken-van Everdingen MHJ, de Rijke JM, Kessels AG. Prevalence of pain in patients with cancer: a systematic review of the past 40 years. Ann Oncol Off J Eur Soc Med Onco. 2007; 18:1437-1449. DOI
  55. Simone CB, Vapiwala N, Hampshire MK. Cancer patient attitudes toward analgesic usage and pain intervention. Clin J Pain. 2012; 28:157-162. DOI
  56. Deandrea S, Montanari M, Moja L. Prevalence of undertreatment in cancer pain. A review of published literature. Ann Oncol. 2008; 19:1985-1991. DOI
  57. National Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc.. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) Adult Cancer Pain, Version 1.2015. National 11 Comprehensive Cancer Network, Inc.: Fort Washington, PA USA; 2015.
  58. Gobbens RJ. Associations of ADL and IADL disability with physical and mental dimensions of quality of life in people aged 75 years and older. Peer J. 2018; 6:e5425. DOI
  59. Brekke MF, la Cour K, Brandt Å. The association between adl ability and quality of life among people with advanced cancer. Vol. 2019. Occupational Therapy International: Hindawi; 2019. DOI
  60. Segev-Jacubovski O, Magen H, Maeir A. Functional ability, participation, and health-related quality of life after hip fracture. OTJR Occup Particip Health. 2019; 39:41-47. DOI

Affiliations

Diego Chambergo-Michilot

CHANGE Research Working Group, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Carrera de Medicina Humana, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Perú

Rodrigo Corcuera-Ciudad

CHANGE Research Working Group, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Carrera de Medicina Humana, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Perú

Fernando M. Runzer-Colmenares

CHANGE Research Working Group, Facultad de Ciencias de la Salud, Carrera de Medicina Humana, Universidad Científica del Sur, Lima, Perú; Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Facultad de Medicina Humana, Centro de Investigación del Envejecimiento (CIEN), Lima, Perú; Bamboo Seniors Health Services, Lima, Perú

Ana Patricia Navarrete-Reyes

Department of Geriatric Medicine, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Médicas y Nutrición Salvador Zubirán, Mexico City, Mexico

José F. Parodi

Universidad de San Martín de Porres, Facultad de Medicina Humana, Centro de Investigación del Envejecimiento (CIEN), Lima, Perú; Bamboo Seniors Health Services, Lima, Perú

Copyright

© JOURNAL OF GERONTOLOGY AND GERIATRICS , 2021

How to Cite

[1]
Chambergo-Michilot, D., Corcuera-Ciudad , R., Runzer-Colmenares, F.M., Navarrete-Reyes, A.P. and Parodi , J.F. 2021. Pain management, activities of daily living and the assessment of the WHOQOL-OLD module: results of a cross-sectional analysis of a cohort of older men with oncological diagnoses. JOURNAL OF GERONTOLOGY AND GERIATRICS. (Oct. 2021). DOI:https://doi.org/10.36150/2499-6564-N395.
  • Abstract viewed - 144 times
  • PDF downloaded - 37 times