Pollack Lauren O, McCune Ashley M, Mandal Konoy, Lundgren Jennifer D
Department of Psychology, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City (Mss Pollack and McCune and Dr Lundgren); and Centennial Peaks Hospital, St Louisville, Colorado (Dr Mandal).
Prim Care Companion CNS Disord. 2015 Apr 30;17(2). doi: 10.4088/PCC.14m01667. eCollection 2015.
To examine the quality of a broad range of life domains using both quantitative and qualitative methodologies.
Forty-eight individuals seeking inpatient treatment for an eating disorder (mean age = 29.8 years, female = 100%, white = 96.4%) from 2007 to 2009 completed the Quality of Life Inventory (QOLI) and the Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire; a medical chart review confirmed diagnosis and treatment history. Patients diagnosed with anorexia nervosa (n = 24) and bulimia nervosa (n = 24) were compared. Body mass index (kg/m(2)), treatment history, number of comorbid psychiatric conditions, and eating disorder severity were used to predict quality of life. Finally, an inductive content analysis was performed on qualitative QOLI responses to contextualize the quantitative findings.
Participants with anorexia nervosa, compared to those with bulimia nervosa, reported significantly less satisfaction with the domain of relatives (F 1,46 = 5.35; P = .025); no other significant group differences were found. The only significant predictor of QOLI global score was number of previous treatments (F 1,41 = 8.67; P = .005; R (2) = 0.175). Content analysis of qualitative data yielded complementary findings to the quantitative data; interesting group differences emerged for satisfaction with health with implications for measuring quality of life domains.
Across several life domains, individuals seeking treatment for anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa appear to have similar levels of satisfaction, as evidenced by numeric and descriptive responses. Satisfaction with relatives, however, appears to differ between groups and suggests a specific target for intervention among patients in treatment for anorexia nervosa (eg, a family-based intervention such as the Maudsley approach). The use of quantitative and qualitative assessments, such as the QOLI, provides more clinically meaningful, contextualized information about quality of life than traditional self-report assessments alone.
运用定量和定性方法检验广泛生活领域的质量。
2007年至2009年，48名因饮食失调寻求住院治疗的个体（平均年龄=29.8岁，女性占100%，白人占96.4%）完成了生活质量量表（QOLI）和饮食失调检查问卷；病历审查确认了诊断和治疗史。对诊断为神经性厌食症（n = 24）和神经性贪食症（n = 24）的患者进行了比较。使用体重指数（kg/m²）、治疗史、共病精神疾病数量和饮食失调严重程度来预测生活质量。最后，对定性的QOLI回答进行归纳性内容分析，以将定量结果置于情境中。
与神经性贪食症患者相比，神经性厌食症患者对亲属领域的满意度显著较低（F 1,46 = 5.35；P = .025）；未发现其他显著的组间差异。QOLI总体得分的唯一显著预测因素是既往治疗次数（F 1,41 = 8.67；P = .005；R² = 0.175）。定性数据的内容分析得出了与定量数据互补的结果；在对健康的满意度方面出现了有趣的组间差异，这对生活质量领域的测量有影响。
在多个生活领域，寻求神经性厌食症和神经性贪食症治疗的个体似乎有相似的满意度水平，这在数字和描述性回答中得到了证明。然而，两组在对亲属的满意度上似乎存在差异，这表明对于神经性厌食症患者的治疗（例如，像莫兹利方法这样的基于家庭的干预）有一个特定的干预目标。使用定量和定性评估（如QOLI）比单独使用传统的自我报告评估能提供更多关于生活质量的具有临床意义的情境化信息。
