A poorer nutritional status impacts quality of life in a sample population of elderly cancer patients

Rationale Quality of Life (QoL) is impaired in cancer, and the elderly are particularly vulnerable to malnutrition. A diagnosis of cancer in elderly patients further exacerbates risks of negative health outcomes. Here we investigated associations between QoL and nutritional status in a sample population of mostly socially deprived elderly cancer patients. Method 432 cancer patients were recruited for this cross-sectional study at point of admission to a tertiary referral hospital for cancer treatment. Patient-generated subjective global assessment (PG-SGA) assessed nutritional status. Functional assessment of cancer therapy- general (FACT-G) quantified QoL. Relationship between PG-SGA and QoL was assessed by Spearman correlation. PG-SGA outcomes were compared against FACT-G scores employing Mann–Whitney test. Bivariate Linear Regression Model was employed to investigate influences of sociodemographic, clinical and nutritional status upon QoL. Results 37.5% of participants were malnourished or at risk. 39% were illiterate and 54.6% had family income lower than minimum wage. Malnourished patients showed lower FACT-G scores (76.8 vs. 84.7; p = 0.000). Poor nutritional diagnosis was inversely correlated with all QoL domains. Bivariate regression analysis showed that lower PG-SGA scores (βo =  − 1.00; p = 0.000) contributed to FACT-G score deterioration, the male gender showed better QoL scores, and other clinical and sociodemographic variables did not show relationship. Conclusion Poorer nutritional status was significantly associated with worsened physical, social, emotional and functional well-being QoL domains in elderly cancer patients. Poorer nutritional status is an independent risk factor for worsened QoL. Future policies aimed at particularly vulnerable populations may improve QoL and health outcomes

A amostragem na avaliação das lixas-do-coqueiro Sampling in the evaluation of the coconut verrucoses

A avaliação das doenças foliares do coqueiro (Cocos nucifera L.), conhecidas como lixa-grande e lixa-pequena (verrugoses), causadas por Sphaeredothis acrocomiae e Phyllachora torrendiella, respectivamente, depara-se com o problema do método de amostragem, uma vez que não existe um método consensual em uso. Este trabalho foi realizado com o objetivo de comparar dois métodos de coleta de amostras mais utilizados na avaliação dessas doenças: método A: coleta de seis folíolos/planta, em uma única folha; método B: coleta de seis folíolos/planta, um em cada folha. O estudo foi desenvolvido a partir de três amostras de 300 folíolos (dez plantas x cinco folhas x seis folíolos), coletados em três genótipos de coqueiro, nos quais foi determinado o número de estromas da lixa-grande e da lixa-pequena. Com base nesses dados, estimaram-se as variâncias de folhas dentro de plantas e folíolos dentro de folhas e plantas, necessárias para os cálculos das estimativas das médias amostrais nos dois métodos em comparação, além de outras alternativas formuladas. Em ambas as lixas, em todos os genótipos, as estimativas da variância da média amostral calculadas pelo método A foram superiores às calculadas pelo método B, o que comprova que este último é mais eficaz que o primeiro. Outros tamanhos de amostra também foram avaliados e comparados ao método B, e constatou-se que amostras de seis folhas/planta, coletando-se, em cada uma, dois ou três folíolos, reduzem a variância amostral em 20% ou 30%, respectivamente, podendo, portanto, ser utilizadas com mais eficiência.<br>The evaluation of leaf diseases of coconuts, Cocos nucifera L., known as large verrucose and small verrucose, caused by Sphaerodothis acrocomiae and Phyllachora torrendiella, respectively, come upon the problem of sampling method. Since there is not a consensual method for measuring coconut verrucose incidence, the present work was done with the objective of comparing two sampling methods of common use: method A: sampling six leaflets/plant in a single leaf; method B: sampling six leaflets/plant, from different leaves. The study was developed starting from three samples of 300 leaflets (ten plants x five leaves x six leaflets) collected in three coconut genotypes, in which the stromata number of large verrucose and of small verrucose were counted. Throughout these data the variance was calculated from the leaf in the plant and the leaflet in the leaf and plant, necessary for the estimated sample average in the two compared methods, as well in the other formulated alternatives. For the two diseases, in all the genotypes, the estimate of variance of the sample mean calculated by the A method was higher than the one calculated by the B method, showing that the last method is more appropriate than the first one. Other sample sizes were also studied and compared by the B method, resulting that sample of two or three leaflets collected in six leaves per plant decreased sample variance on respectively 20% or 30%, probably being of more accurate applicability