RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the influence of various clinical factors on the quality of life perception of patients with epilepsy over a follow-up period in current clinical practice. METHODS: Thirty-five PWE evaluated via video-electro-encephalography in the Clinical Hospital of Psychiatry and Neurology in Brasov, Romania, were included, and the quality of life was assessed using the Romanian version of the QOLIE-31-P questionnaire. RESULTS: At baseline, the mean age was 40.03 (±14.63) years; the mean duration of epilepsy was 11.46 (±12.90) years; the mean age at the first seizure was 28.57 (±18.72); and the mean duration between evaluations was 23.46 (±7.54) months. The mean (SD) QOLIE-31-P total score at the initial visit (68.54 ±15.89) was lower than the mean (SD) QOLIE-31-P total score at the follow-up (74.15 ± 17.09). Patients with epileptiform activity recorded via video-electro-encephalography, using polytherapy, those with uncontrolled seizures, and those with one or more seizures per month had statistically significantly lower QOLIE-31-P total scores at baseline and follow-up. Multiple linear regression analyses revealed seizure frequency as a significant inverse predictor of quality of life in both evaluations. CONCLUSIONS: The QOLIE-31-P total score was improved during the follow-up period, and medical professionals should use instruments to evaluate quality of life and identify patterns while trying to improve the outcomes of patients with epilepsy.
RESUMO
This study investigates the impact of different clinical and demographic factors on the quality of life in people with epilepsy hospitalized at a health institution of Brasov County, Romania, using a QOLIE-31-P questionnaire and to reflect on the opportunities and limitations of incorporating such an instrument into the clinical practice. Methods: Ninety-one patients with a diagnosis of epilepsy evaluated by video-electroencephalography in the Clinical Hospital of Psychiatry and Neurology in Brasov, Romania, were recruited. After the confirmation of the diagnosis based on clinical, electrophysiological and imagistic examination, and of their compliance with the hospitalization criteria, the patients filled in the QOLIE-31-P questionnaire. Socio-demographic and clinical data were collected. Results: The seizure frequency was negatively correlated with almost all QOLIE-31-P domains (p < 0.05). Age, employment status, level of education and uncontrolled disease were significant factors associated with a low quality of life. The mean (SD) QOLIE-31-P scores were 64.89 (14.72), the mean age was 43.04 (14.92) years, with the average age of the first seizure onset 30.66 (17.45) years. Conclusion: The use of measuring instruments to assess the quality of life of patients with epilepsy despite the challenges should become a routine practice, the information collected in this way can improve the outcomes in the care of these patients. In addition to the goal of reducing the frequency of seizures, physicians must also take into account other parts of the experiences of people with epilepsy.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: The study proposes an analysis of the ethical aspects that occur in communicating bad news following histopathology laboratory tests in medical practice, in particular in the case of the anatomical pathology diagnosis confirming a medical condition of poor prognosis. BACKGROUND: Over the last decades, the progress of science and technology in the medical field, as well as the explosive increase of specialist information available on the Internet have led to unprecedented ethical issues related to the communication modality of histopathology test results to patients. CONTENT: The paper analyses from an ethical and legislative perspective the main ethical dilemmas that occur when choosing a modality for communicating test results. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: While communicating bad news is an essential ability for medical professionals, it should be used within the context of observing the patients' right to decide whether they wish to receive such information or not and their right to their own autonomy, by means of a personalized protocol for communicating bad news in current medical practice.