medigraphic.com
ISSN 1405-1710 (Print)

2007, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Cent Dermatol Pascua 2007; 16 (1)

Juvenile inflammatory acne. Evaluation of the quality of life through the SF-36 survey

Santamaría GV, Valdés WRL

Language: Spanish
References: 17
Page: 7-13
PDF size: 136.49 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Acne vulgaris is a chronic inflammation of the pilosebaceous unit. The quality of life in these patients is affected to a degree that it can alter their emotional stability and productivity. Objective: Determine the magnitude of the quality of life in healthy people and in patients with inflammatory acne vulgaris. Materials and methods: We applied the survey to a sample of 403 patients that met the inclusion criteria, during the period of March 13th to June 30th, 2006. Results: They were divided in 4 groups: subjects without acne and with mild, moderate and severe inflammatory acne, showing a significant statistical difference in the quality of life. Conclusions: The perception in the quality of life was worst in the subjects with acne, independently of the severity. Women had the worst quality of life and the age group most affected was between 21 and 25 years old.


REFERENCES

  1. Hanna S, Sharma J, Klotz J. Acne vulgaris: More than skin deep. Dermatol Online J 2006; 9(3): 1-8.

  2. Santamaría GV. Acné vulgar o juvenil. Rev Centr Dermatol Pascua 2000; 9: 49-56.

  3. Gómez M, Vidaurri LM. Importancia epidemiológica del acné. Resultados preliminares de un estudio epidemiológico de las principales dermatosis. Dermatol Rev Mex 2003; 47: 95-97.

  4. Primer Consenso Mexicano para el Manejo del Acné. Dermatol Rev Mex 2003; 47(2): 98-100.

  5. Torres LV et al. Acné y rosácea. PAC de Dermatología. 1a ed. No. 7, Acné. Pp. 20-21; Intersistemas, México, 2000.

  6. Koo JY, Smith LL. Psychologic aspects of acne. Ped Dermatol 1991; 8: 185-188.

  7. Mulder MM, Sigurdsson V, van Zuuren EJ et al. Psychosocial impact of acne vulgaris. Evaluation of the relation between a change in clinical acne severity and psychosocial state. Dermatology 2001; 203(2): 124-130.

  8. Velarde-Jurado E, Avila-Figueroa C. Consideraciones metodológicas para evaluar la calidad de vida. Salud Pública Mex 2002; 44(5): 448-463.

  9. Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NMB, O’Cathain A, Usherwood T, Westlake J. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. Br Med Jour 1992; 305: 60-164.

  10. Ware JE. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center 1993.

  11. McHorney CA, Ware JE (Jr), Raczek, AE. The MOS 36-Item short form health survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and Clinical Tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993; 31(3): 247-263.

  12. Ware JE. The MOS 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). In Sederer, L. I & Dickey, B. Outcomes Assessment in Clinical Practice. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins 1996.

  13. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short form health survey (SF-36.) I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care 1992; 30: 473-483.

  14. Warre JE. SF-36 Health survey update. Spine 2000; 25(24): 3130-3139.

  15. Zuñiga AM, Carrillo JGT, Fos PJ et al. Evaluación del estado de salud con la encuesta SF-36. Resultados preliminares en México. Salud Pública Mex 1999; 41: 110-118.

  16. Australian Bureau of Statistics. National Health Survey: SF-36 Population Norms. 1995; 4399-4400.

  17. Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Wright L. Short Form 36 (SF-36 health survey questionnaire: Normative data for adults of working age. Br Med Jour 1993; 306(6890): 1437-1440.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com