Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Padjadjaran, Bandung, Indonesia.
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2022 Nov 1;23(11):3611-3616. doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2022.23.11.3611.
The purpose of this study was to analyze the relationship between quality of life with the JCAHO and the ESAS scoring system, and to compare the JCAHO and the ESAS scoring system in determining the palliative care needs of gynecological cancer patients treated at RSHS.
The subjects of this study were all gynecological cancer patients who were treated at RSHS in May-August 2020. This study was an analytic study with a cross sectional design. The data of this study were obtained from interviews, questionnaires and patient medical records, the study was analyzed bivariate using chi square with α = 0.05.
The results showed that the quality of life of patients with gynecological cancer was associated with the JCAHO palliative score (p <0.05), the better the patient's quality of life, the better the JCAHO palliative score. The quality of life of gynecological cancer patients was related to ESAS (p <0.05), the better the patient's quality of life, the better the ESAS. There was difference between the JCAHO palliative score and the ESAS in determining the palliative care needs of gynecological cancer patients (p< 0.05).
Quality of life has correlation with palliative scores, the lower the palliative score, the better the quality of life. This study showed significant difference between the JCAHO palliative score and the ESAS in determining the palliative care needs of gynecological cancer patients. The JCAHO palliative score measures objectively how the patient is on admission for treatment, this score not only measures the intensity of symptoms but measures the underlying disease, comorbid disease, functional status of the patient and other criteria for the patient. ESAS assesses the intensity of symptoms, the assessment of palliative care needed can change rapidly if the intensity of symptoms in patients changes.
本研究旨在分析生活质量与 JCAHO 和 ESAS 评分系统的关系，并比较 JCAHO 和 ESAS 评分系统在确定 RSHS 治疗的妇科癌症患者的姑息治疗需求方面的作用。
本研究的对象均为 2020 年 5 月至 8 月在 RSHS 接受治疗的妇科癌症患者。这是一项横断面分析研究。本研究的数据来自访谈、问卷调查和患者病历，采用α=0.05 的卡方检验进行双变量分析。
研究结果表明，妇科癌症患者的生活质量与 JCAHO 姑息评分相关（p<0.05），患者生活质量越好，JCAHO 姑息评分越高。妇科癌症患者的生活质量与 ESAS 相关（p<0.05），患者生活质量越好，ESAS 越高。JCAHO 姑息评分和 ESAS 在确定妇科癌症患者的姑息治疗需求方面存在差异（p<0.05）。
生活质量与姑息评分相关，姑息评分越低，生活质量越好。本研究表明，JCAHO 姑息评分和 ESAS 在确定妇科癌症患者的姑息治疗需求方面存在显著差异。JCAHO 姑息评分客观地衡量了患者入院治疗的情况，该评分不仅衡量了症状的强度，还衡量了潜在疾病、合并症、患者的功能状态和其他患者标准。ESAS 评估症状的强度，如果患者的症状强度发生变化，对姑息治疗需求的评估可能会迅速改变。
