Qualidade de vida de mulheres com baixa massa óssea na pós-menopausa
Carregando...
Data
2011-03-01
Autores
Dallanezi, Glauber
Nahás, Eliana Aguiar Petri [UNESP]
Freire, Beatriz Funayama [UNESP]
Nahas-Neto, Jorge [UNESP]
Corrente, José Eduardo [UNESP]
Mazeto, Glaucia Maria Ferreira da Silva [UNESP]
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Federação Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Resumo
OBJETIVO: avaliar a qualidade de vida de pacientes com osteoporose e osteopenia, acompanhadas em ambulatórios especializados em osteoporose e climatério, comparando-as com pacientes com densidade mineral óssea (DMO) normal. MÉTODOS: estudo de série de casos transversal, observacional, que se propôs a analisar, por meio do questionário Medical Outcomes Study 36 Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), a qualidade de vida de mulheres com osteopenia e osteoporose. Foram avaliadas 124 mulheres na pós-menopausa divididas em três grupos: 55 pacientes com diagnóstico densitométrico de osteoporose, 35 com o de osteopenia e 34 que apresentavam DMO normal. Os três grupos foram comparados com relação aos dados demográficos, características clínicas e de estilo de vida e aos diferentes domínios do SF-36. RESULTADOS: as pacientes dos grupos osteopenia e DMO normal apresentaram menor idade média (56,7±7,1 e 52,9±5,4 anos), maior índice de massa corpórea (IMC) (28,6±3,7 e 30,9±5,1 kg/m²) e menor tempo de menopausa (8,4±5,9 e 5,8±4,5 anos) quando comparadas ao grupo osteoporose (61,8±10,1 anos, IMC de 25,7±5,3 kg/m², 15,5±7,5 anos, respectivamente; p<0,05). de acordo com o SF-36, não houve diferença significativa entre os grupos com relação aos domínios, à exceção do domínio vitalidade, que se mostrou superior no grupo osteoporose. Com relação à impressão pessoal sobre seu estado de saúde, das pacientes que o consideraram bom, um maior percentual pertencia ao grupo osteoporose, e entre aquelas que o consideraram ruim, um percentual menor pertencia ao grupo osteopenia. CONCLUSÃO: a qualidade de vida foi similar em mulheres com osteoporose e osteopenia, em relação às com DMO normal, à exceção do domínio vitalidade, que foi superior, paradoxalmente, nas pacientes com osteoporose.
PURPOSE: to evaluate the quality of life of patients with osteoporosis and osteopenia followed-up at outpatient clinics specialized in osteoporosis and climacterium and to compare it to that of patients with normal bone mineral density (BMD). METHODS: cross-sectional case series, observational study, which intended to analyze the quality of life of women with osteopenia and osteoporosis by the Medical Outcomes Study 36 Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) questionnaire. We evaluated 124 postmenopausal women divided into three groups: 55 patients with a densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis, 35 with osteopenia and 34 who presented a normal BMD. The three groups were compared in terms of demographic data, clinical and life style characteristics and the different domains of SF-36. RESULTS: patients from the osteopenia and normal BMD groups presented lower age (56.7±7.1 and 52.9±5.4 years), greater body mass index (BMI) (28.6±3.7 and 30.9±5.1 kg/m²) and shorter time since menopause (8.4±5.9 and 5.8±4.5 years) than those from the osteoporosis group (61.8±10.1 years, BMI of 25.7±5.3 kg/m², 15.5±7.5 years, respectively; p<0.05). According to SF-36, there was no significant difference between groups concerning the domains, except for the vitality domain, which was found to be superior in the osteoporosis group. Regarding the personal impression about their health, a greater percentage of the patients who considered it to be good was from the osteoporosis group and, of the patients who considered it bad, a smaller percentage belonged to the osteopenia group. CONCLUSION: the quality of life was similar in women with osteoporosis and osteopenia when compared to women with normal BMD, except for the vitality domain, which, paradoxically, was superior in patients with osteoporosis.
PURPOSE: to evaluate the quality of life of patients with osteoporosis and osteopenia followed-up at outpatient clinics specialized in osteoporosis and climacterium and to compare it to that of patients with normal bone mineral density (BMD). METHODS: cross-sectional case series, observational study, which intended to analyze the quality of life of women with osteopenia and osteoporosis by the Medical Outcomes Study 36 Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) questionnaire. We evaluated 124 postmenopausal women divided into three groups: 55 patients with a densitometric diagnosis of osteoporosis, 35 with osteopenia and 34 who presented a normal BMD. The three groups were compared in terms of demographic data, clinical and life style characteristics and the different domains of SF-36. RESULTS: patients from the osteopenia and normal BMD groups presented lower age (56.7±7.1 and 52.9±5.4 years), greater body mass index (BMI) (28.6±3.7 and 30.9±5.1 kg/m²) and shorter time since menopause (8.4±5.9 and 5.8±4.5 years) than those from the osteoporosis group (61.8±10.1 years, BMI of 25.7±5.3 kg/m², 15.5±7.5 years, respectively; p<0.05). According to SF-36, there was no significant difference between groups concerning the domains, except for the vitality domain, which was found to be superior in the osteoporosis group. Regarding the personal impression about their health, a greater percentage of the patients who considered it to be good was from the osteoporosis group and, of the patients who considered it bad, a smaller percentage belonged to the osteopenia group. CONCLUSION: the quality of life was similar in women with osteoporosis and osteopenia when compared to women with normal BMD, except for the vitality domain, which, paradoxically, was superior in patients with osteoporosis.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Pós-menopausa, Doenças ósseas metabólicas, Osteoporose pós-menopausa, Questionários Saúde da mulher, Qualidade de vida, Postmenopause, Bone diseases, metabolic, Osteoporosis, postmenpausal, Questionnaires Women's health, Life quality
Como citar
Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. Federação Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia, v. 33, n. 3, p. 133-138, 2011.