Main Article Content
Background: Quality of life and perceived health status are common indicators of outcome measurement among occupational therapist. However, the complexity of these two concepts and their relationships resulted in misunderstanding to use for outcome measurement among health professions. Therefore, identifying of the concept and choosing an appropriate tool for evaluation are necessary.
Objective: The purposes of this study were to examine the levels and correlations between quality of life and perceived health status among thirty people with spinal cord injury living in their communities.
Material and methods: Two self-administrative questionnaires: WHOQOL-BREF: Thai version, and SF-36 V2: Thai version, had been used to measure quality of life and perceived health status among 30 participants.
Result: Scores of WHOQOL-Brief: Thai version can be classified as average (85.03±9.86) compared to Thais’ norms and other studies among people with spinal cord injury in Thailand. The SF-36 V2: Thai version score was lower than Thais’ norms in physical component summary score (PCS) while the score of mental component summary score (MCS) was in the same level compared to Thais’ norms. The result also showed the statistical significance of correlation between SF-36 and WHOQOL-BREF, except general health (GF) of SF-36 subcomponent.
Conclusion: The result showed a foundation and hierarchal order of perceived heath status that were effect on a level of quality of life among people with spinal cord injury. The coping strategies with physical problems and participation also affected quality of life among participants although their physical conditions had been limited by disability status.
Bull Chiang Mai Assoc Med Sci 2016; 49(2): 185-196. Doi: 10.14456/jams.2016.26
Personal views expressed by the contributors in their articles are not necessarily those of the Journal of Associated Medical Sciences, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Chiang Mai University.
2. Pajareya K. Traumatic spinal cord injuries in Thailand: An epidemiologic study in Siriraj Hospital, 1989 - 1994. Spinal Cord 1996; 34: 608-10. (in Thai).
3. Kovindha A. Manual for spinal cord injured persons. 3rd Edition. Chaing Mai: Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University; 2001. (in Thai).
4. Singkumfu L. Managing everday life among Thai men with paraplegia: A grounded theory study: Chiang Mai University; 2000. (in Thai).
5. Westgren N, Levi R. Quality of life and traumatic spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehb 1998; 79: 1433-9.
6. Putzke JD, Richards JS, Dowler RN. The impact of pain in spinal cord injury: A case–control study. Rehabil Psychol 2000; 45: 386-401.
7. Dijkers M. Quality of life of individual with spinal cors injury: A review of conceptualization, meassurement, and research findings. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005; 42(3): 87-110.
8. Summers JD, Rapoff MA, Varghese G, Porter K, Palmer RE. Psychosocial factors in chronic spinal cord injury pain. Pain 1991; 47(2): 183-9.
9. Abramson N. Quality of life: Who can make the judgement? Am J Med 1996;100:365-6.
10. Hampton NZ, Qin-Hilliard DB. Dimension of quality of life for Chinese adults with spinal cord injury: A qualitative study. Disabil Rehabil 2004; 26: 203-12.
11. Hayry M. Measuring the quality of life: Why, how and what? Theor Med 1991; 12(2): 97-116.
12. The special interest research group on quality of life. Quality of life: Its conceptualization, measurement, and application. A consensus document. Geneva: WHO-IASSID Plan, 2000.
13. Post M, Noreau L. Quality of life after spinal cord injury. J Neurol Rehabil 2005; 29(3): 139-46.
14. Balioussis C, Hitzig SL, Flett H, Noreau L, Craven BC. Identifying and classifying quality of life tools for assessing spasticity after spinal cord injury. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2014; 20(3): 208-24.
15. Tate D, Forchheimer M. Review of cross-cultural issue related to quality of life after spinal cord injury. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2014; 20(3): 181-90.
16. Boakye M, Leigh B, Skelly A. Quality of life in persons with spinal cord injury: Comparisons with other population. J Neurosurg-spine 2012; 17: 29-37.
17. Trevittaya P. Life experiences and quality of life among people with spinal cord injuries in Northern Thailand. Sydney: University of Sydney; 2008.
18. WHO. ICF: International classification of functioning, disability and health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
19. Ventegodt S, Hilden J, Christiansen BZ. Measuring the quality of life: A methodological framework 1995. [cited 1998 April, 24]. Available from: http://home2.inet.tele.dk/fclk/mqi2.htm.
20. Lin MR, Hwang HF, Chen CY, Chiu WT. Comparisons of the brief form of the World Health Organization quality of life and short form-36 for persons with spinal cord injury. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2007; 86: 104-13.
21. Cummins RA. Moving from the quality of life concept to a theory. J Intell Disabil Res 2005;49:699-706.
22. Huang I, Wu. A. W, Frangakis C. Do SF-36 and WHOQOL-BREF measure the same constructs? Evidence from the Taiwan population. Qual Life Res 2006; 15: 15-24.
23. Aquarone RL, Faro CM. Scales on quality of life in patients with spinal cord injury: Integrative review. Einstein 2014; 12(2): 245-50.
24. Leduc BE, Lepage Y. Health-related quality of life after spinal cord injury. Disabil Rehabil 2002; 24: 196-202.
25. Lidal I, Veenstra M, Hjeltnes N, Biering-Sorensen F. Health-related quality of life in persons with long-standing spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 2008; 46: 710-5.
26. Dajpratham P, Kongkasuwan R. Quality of life among the traumatic spinal cord injured patients. J Med Assoc Thai 2011; 94(10): 1252-9.
27. Lude P, Kennedy P, Elfstrom ML, Ballert CS. Quality of life in and after spinal cord injury rehabilitation: A longitudinal multicenter study. Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil 2014; 20(3): 197-207.
28. Trgovcevic S, Milicevic M, Nedovic G, Jovanic G. Health condition and quality of life in person with spinal cord injury. Iran J Public Health 2014; 43(9): 1229-38.
29. Choochart N, Vichiansiri R, Arayawichanon P, Manimmanakorn N. Quality of life of traumatic spinal cord injured patients in North-East region of Thailand. J Thai Rehabil Med 2015; 25(1): 15-21. (in Thai).
30. Geyh S, Ballert C, Sinnott A, Charlifue S, Catz A, D’Andrea Greve JM, et al. Quality of life after spinal cord injury: A comparison across six countries. Spinal Cord 2013; 51: 322-6.
31. Noonan V, Chan C. Short From 36 (SF-36): Spinal Cord Injury Research Evidence 2013 [cited 2010 May, 10]. Available from: http://www.scireproject.com/outcome-measures-new/short-form-36-sf-36.
32. Jirarathanaphochai K, Ji S, Sumanon C, Sangnipankun S. Reliabilty of SF-36 V2: Thai version evaluation among people with back pain. Department of Orthopedic: Faculty of Medicine, Khonkan University; 2005. (in Thai).
33. Kankumnanata S. The study of perceived helath status among people with spinal cord injury: Using SF-36 V2: Thai version. Department of Occupational Therapy: Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences; 2006. (in Thai).
34. Department of Mental Health. World Health Organization Quality of Life Questionnaire – BREF: Thai version (WHOQOL–BREF: THAI). 2009 [cited 2009 June, 5 ]. Available from: http://www.dmh.moph.go.th/test/whoqol/. (in Thai).
35. Lormanakun W, Meetam P. The deveopment of health related quality of life SF-36: Thai version. Thai Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 2005; 24: 92-111. (in Thai).
36. Mahatnirankul S, Silpakit P, Pumpaisalchai W. The quality of life during the economic crisis in Thailand. Journal of Mental Health of Thailand 2000; 8: 112-23. (in Thai).
37. Wannapakhe J, Amatachaya S, Siritaratiwat W, Arrayawichanon P, Wattanapan P. Physical abilities, quality of life, incidences of complications and falls in patients with chronic spinal cord injury after discharge. J Med Tech Phy Ther 2010; 22(2): 188-95. (in Thai).
38. Kongsakorn R, Silpakit C, Udomsubpayakul U. Thailand normative data for SF-36 health survey: Bangkok metropolitan. . The ASEAN Journal of Psychiatry 2007; 8(2): 85-103.
39. Haren MJ, Lee BB, King MT, Marial O, Stockler MR. Health status rated with the medical outcomes study 36 items short form health survey after spinal cord injury. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2005; 86: 2290-5.
40. Chuenklin T. Life experiences as being paraplegic patients. Journal of Sonklanakarin Nursing College 2000; 20: 230-47. (in Thai).
41. Thipmala J. Coping process for stress among paraplegic patients.: Chaing Mai University; 2008. (in Thai).
42. Cummins RA, Nistico H. Maintaining subjective well-being and avoiding depression: The role of cognitive illusions. Soc Indi Res 2000; 43: 307-34.
43. Pongboriboon P, Tongprasert S, Kovindha A. Quality of life in persons with spinal cord injury: A comparative study between those with indwelling catheterization and intermittent catheterization. J Thai Rehabil Med 2011; 21(1): 13-20. (in Thai).
44. Hays RD, Hahn H, Marshall G. Using of SF-36 and other health-related quality of life measures to assess persons with disabilities. . Arch Phys Med Rehab 2002; 82: S4-S9.
45. Christiansen CH, Baum CM. Occupational therapy: Enabling function and well-being. 2nd ed. Thorofare: SLACK Incorporated 1997: 2-25.