Health, Health-Related Quality of Life, and Quality of Life: What is the Difference?

The terms health, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and quality of life (QoL) are used interchangeably. Given that these are three key terms in the literature, their appropriate and clear use is important. This paper reviews the history and definitions of the terms and considers how they have been used. It is argued that the definitions of HRQoL in the literature are problematic because some definitions fail to distinguish between HRQoL and health or between HRQoL and QoL. Many so-called HRQoL questionnaires actually measure self-perceived health status and the use of the phrase QoL is unjustified. It is concluded that the concept of HRQoL as used now is confusing. A potential solution is to define HRQoL as the way health is empirically estimated to affect QoL or use the term to only signify the utility associated with a health state

Born to be Happy? The Etiology of Subjective Well-Being

Subjective Wellbeing (SWB) can be assessed with distinct measures that have been hypothesized to represent different domains of SWB. The current study assessed SWB with four different measures in a genetically informative sample of adolescent twins and their siblings aged 13–28 years (N = 5,024 subjects from 2,157 families). Multivariate genetic modeling was applied to the data to explore the etiology of individual differences in SWB measures and the association among them. Developmental trends and sex differences were examined for mean levels and the variance-covariance structure. Mean SWB levels were equal in men and women. A small negative effect of age on mean levels of SWB was found. Individual differences in SWB were accounted for by additive and non-additive genetic influences, and non-shared environment. The broad-sense heritabilities were estimated between 40 and 50%. The clustering of the four different measures (quality of life in general, satisfaction with life, quality of life at present, and subjective happiness) was explained by an underlying additive genetic factor and an underlying non-additive genetic factor. The effect of these latent genetic factors on the phenotypes was not moderated by either age or sex

Percepção de nutrizes acerca de sua qualidade de vida

A amamentação é retratada pelas mulheres como um período de sobrecarga física e emocional. O estudo teve como objetivo compreender a percepção de nutrizes, atendidas em uma Unidade Básica de Saúde (UBS), no município de São Paulo, acerca de sua qualidade de vida (QV). Trata-se de uma pesquisa exploratória qualitativa, com a participação de 202 nutrizes, que responderam ao Instrumento de Avaliação de QV (WHOQOL-bref), seguido pela realização de perguntas abertas e entrevista. Os dados foram organizados segundo a proposta do Discurso do Sujeito Coletivo (DSC). As nutrizes, ao descreverem o que é QV, utilizaram elementos objetivos e subjetivos como qualificadores de sua experiência de vida. Constatou-se a importância do planejamento de uma assistência de enfermagem acerca da amamentação desde o pré-natal, que incentive principalmente a participação do companheiro no cuidado com a criança e promova o preparo da família para apoiar a nutriz, o que certamente levará a uma melhor percepção acerca de sua QV

Avaliação da qualidade de vida geral de agentes comunitários de saúde: a contribuição relativa das variáveis sociodemográficas e dos domínios da qualidade de vida Evaluation of overall quality of life of community health agents: the relative contribution of sociodemographic variables and domains of quality of life

OBJETIVO: Avaliar a contribuição relativa de cada domínio da qualidade de vida (físico, psicológico, relações sociais e meio ambiente) e das variáveis sociodemográficas para a qualidade de vida geral de agentes comunitários de saúde de um município do interior do Paraná, Brasil. MÉTODO: Estudo descritivo, de corte transversal e com abordagem quantitativa. O grupo de estudo foi composto por 169 agentes (86,2% do total), que responderam o World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument Bref, instrumento genérico para avaliar qualidade de vida, proposto pela Organização Mundial da Saúde. Foram utilizados testes de correlação e regressão linear multivariada. O nível de significância adotado para as análises foi de 5%. RESULTADOS: Das variáveis sociodemográficas analisadas, nenhuma contribuiu de modo significativo para o domínio geral da qualidade de vida. Para os quatro domínios, o que mais contribuiu para a qualidade de vida geral foi o físico, seguido do psicológico e do meio ambiente, os três explicando 47,9% da variância. O domínio das relações sociais não contribuiu significativamente para a qualidade de vida geral. CONCLUSÃO: Observou-se que a variância da qualidade de vida geral não foi completamente explicada pelas variáveis sociodemográficas e pelos domínios da qualidade de vida. Assim, maior atenção deve ser dada pelos pesquisadores aos diferentes modos de entender qualidade de vida, em especial valorizando métodos de pesquisa e avaliação interdisciplinar.<br>OBJECTIVE: This study aimed at evaluating the relative contribution of each life quality domain (physical, psychological, social relationships and environment) and of sociodemographic variables to overall quality of life of community health agents from a municipality located in the State of Paraná, Brazil. METHODS: A descriptive and cross-sectional study was carried out using a quantitative approach. The sample was composed of 169 agents (86.2% of the total). The World Health Organization Quality of Life Instrument Bref was used as a generic instrument to evaluate quality of life. Correlation tests and multivariate linear regression were used, considering a significance level of 5%. RESULTS: None of the sociodemographic variables significantly interfered with overall quality of life. Among the four domains, the physical domain contributed the most to overall quality of life, followed by the psychological and environment domains, all of them accounting for 47.9% of variance. The domain of social relationships did not show significant contribution to overall quality of life. CONCLUSION: It was observed that variance of overall quality of life was not completely explained by sociodemographic variables neither by quality of life domains. Thus, more attention should be given by researchers to different forms of understanding quality of life, especially research methods and interdisciplinary evaluation

Quality of Life

In J. L. Matson (Ed.), Handbook of Intellectual Disabilities: Integrating Theory, Research, and Practic