Table 2.
Methodological data for studies included in the review
| Author | Analyses of Data | Measures or Interview Topics | Results Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ashing-Giwa et al., 2004 | Qualitative | Fear and anxiety, body image, intimate relationships. | Latinas and Asian Americans discussed how their feelings about their body affected their QOL. Latinas discussed feeling embarrassed, sad, frustrated, ugly, and incomplete. Regarding the major theme of overall stress/effect of breast cancer, Blacks, Asians, and Latinas reported decrements in QOL whereas non-Latina Whites emphasized positive aspects. Latinas emphasized deleterious treatment side effects. |
| Ashing-Giwa et al., 2007 | Quantitative | FACT-G (all subscales) | Latinas were significantly lower on physical, social, emotional, and functional quality of life on FACT-G than non-Latina Whites, Blacks, and Asian Americans. After controlling for covariates, analysis on the FACT-G summary score indicated that ethnic differences were no longer significant. Latinas were significantly lower on SF-36 role limitation and emotional well-being compared to all other groups of women. |
| Cross-sectional | Rand/SF-36 (Role Limitation/Emotional Well-being) | ||
| Ashing Giwa et al., 2009 | Quantitative | SF-36 (Physical and Mental) | Latina ethnicity was significantly related to poorer Mental Health on the SF-36; this disparity was no longer significant when job type and stress were entered into the model. No significant relationship between Latina ethnicity and physical health QOL. |
| Cross-sectional | |||
| Lim et al., 2008 | Quantitative | FACT-G (Emotional and Physical) | Emotional and Physical Well-being scores for Asian Americans were significantly higher than Latinas’ scores. |
| Cross-sectional | |||
| Bowen et al., 2007 | Quantitative | SF-36 (Physical and Mental) | Adjusting for covariates, Black women reported significantly lower impact of cancer on cognitive/mood and incontinence subscales assessing hormone-related symptoms than Latinas and Latinas reported more fear of recurrence than Black women. In a similar set of analyses examining differences in SF-36 Mental and Physical Health summary scores, also adjusting for covariates, Black women evidenced significantly lower physical functioning scores, compared with Latinas, but higher mental health scores. Two additional models were conducted with non-Latina White entered as the referent group. After controlling for covariates, no significant differences between Latinas and non-Latina Whites emerged on physical health, but Latinas evidenced significantly poorer mental health on the SF-36. Latinas did not significantly differ from non-Latina Whites on the scale to assess the social/emotional impact of breast cancer. |
| Cross-sectional | Fear of Recurrence Scale | ||
| Hormone-related symptoms | |||
| Impact of breast cancer(Social/Emotional) | |||
| Carver et al., 2003 | Quantitative | SIP (Social Activities, Recreation and Pastime Activities subscales) | Findings were similar to those of Spencer et al. (1999). Latinas reported more POMS fatigue than non-Latina Whites. Study 2 yielded no racial/ethnic differences in QOL on social disruption, fatigue, and distress. |
| Cross-sectional | POMS (Fatigue subscale) | ||
| *Emotional distress | |||
| Petronis et al., 2003 | Quantitative | Emotional distress (CES-D, 11 items selected from Andrews and Withey SQOL 10 items selected from Carver et al., 1993) | In models controlling for covariates, Latinas indicated significantly greater distress and more social disruption than non-Latinas, but groups did not differ on the PAIS. |
| Cross-sectional | SIP (Social Activities, Recreation and Pastime Activities subscales) | ||
| PAIS (Sexual subscale) | |||
| PCBC | |||
| Spencer et al., 1999 | Quantitative | Emotional disruption (CES-D, POMS, 11 items selected from Andrews and Withey SQOL ) | After controlling for covariates, Latinas reported poorer adjustment than non-Latina White and Black women in all domains of QOL. |
| Cross-sectional | SIP (Social Activities and Recreational Pastimes subscales) | ||
| PAIS (Sexual relations subscale) | |||
| Carver et al., 2005 | Quantitative | CES-D | Latinas had higher scores on the CES-D and SIP than non-Latinas (i.e., non-Latina Whites and Blacks). No significant differences between ethnic groups on distress (ABS/POMS) or self-rated QOL. Initial values on the two other dependent variables (SIP, CES-D) were entered simultaneously with demographic /medical factors. Latina ethnic status was not a significant predictor of change in depressive symptoms and social disruption. |
| Longitudinal | ABS/POMS | ||
| SIP (Social Activities, Recreation and Pastime Activities subscales) | |||
| 10 questions from Andrews and Withey SQOL (1976) | |||
| Carver et al., 2006 | Quantitative | QLACS | Latinas reported significant elevations in negative feelings, social avoidance, distress about family’s future, and distress about recurrence compared to non-Latinas, even when covariates were controlled. Groups did not differ on cognitive impairment and fatigue subscales. |
| Cross-sectional | |||
| Clauser et al., 2008 | Quantitative | SF-36 (Mental and Physical) | Asians evidenced the highest physical QOL, followed by non-Latina Whites, Latinas, and Blacks. Asians evidenced the highest mental QOL, followed by non-Latina Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics. |
| Cross-sectional | |||
| Culver et al., 2002 | Quantitative | CES-D | After controlling for covariates, Latinas did not significantly differ on distress from non-Latinas across time points. However, between 6 and 12 months after surgery, Latinas evidenced a significant increase in distress compared to non-Latina Whites. With covariates controlled, Black women reported significantly lower depressive symptoms than Latinas. |
| Longitudinal | *Distress | ||
| Eversley et al., 2005 | Quantitative | CES-D | Latinas had significantly higher depressive symptoms on the CES-D and fatigue on the Piper Fatigue Scale (PFS) when compared to Black and non-Latina White women. Latinas also evidenced higher rates of pain on the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and lymphedema-related swelling (measured by a single item) when compared to non-Latina White women. Latina ethnic status remained a correlate of total number of post-treatment symptoms even when covariates were controlled. |
| Cross-sectional | PFS | ||
| BPI | |||
| Lymphedema-related Swelling | |||
| Fatone et al., 2007 | Qualitative | Physical, Social/Functional, Psychological, Sexual, Cognitive, Existential | The primary domain of concern for the Latinas was psychological, whereas the primary domain of concern for Black women was physical. Main psychological themes for Latinas were sadness, crying, anxiety, and irritability. In descending order of importance, the remaining areas of concern for Latinas were physical, social/functional, spiritual/existential, cognitive, and sexual. |
| Fobair et al., 2005 | Quantitative | MOS (Sexual Problems) | After controlling for covariates, multiple regression analysis indicated significantly fewer sexual problems among Latinas compared to non-Latina White women. |
| Cross-sectional | |||
| Friedman et al., 2006 | Quantitative | FACT-G (Emotional, Functional, Social/Family subscales) | No significant differences for race/ethnicity on QOL. |
| Cross-sectional | IES (Intrusions) | Latinas, non-Latina Whites, and Blacks did not differ significantly on any of the measures. | |
| POMS-SF (all 6 subscales) | |||
| Fu et al., 2009 | Quantitative | MSAS-SF (Depression, Hormone-related Symptoms, Pain-related Symptoms, Chemotherapy-related Symptoms) | Latinas had more chemotherapy- and pain-related symptoms on the Memorial Symptoms Assessment Scale Short Form than non-Latina Whites when controlling for covariates. No significant ethnic differences emerged on the other areas of QOL. |
| Cross-sectional | |||
| Giedzinska et al., 2004 | Quantitative | SF-36 (all subscales), CARES (Sexual Dysfunction, Sexual Interest, Body Image subscales) | Black women reported significantly higher SF-36 Emotional Well-Being than Latinas, even after covariates were controlled for. No significant differences on the other SF-36 scales were reported. Mean differences in sexual dysfunction were not significant; however, when covariates were controlled, Black women evidenced less sexual dysfunction than Latinas. Black women reported higher Mental Health on the SF-36 than Latinas, even after controlling for covariates. Latinas scored higher than any other ethnic group on symptoms related to breast cancer treatment (BCPT summary score). After controlling for covariates, Latinas did not significantly differ on the BCPT from non-Latina Whites but remained higher than Black and Asian American women. No significant differences for Latinas emerged on the CES-D and Revised Dyadic Adjustment Scale. |
| Cross-sectional | BCPT | ||
| CES-D | |||
| DAS | |||
| Janz et al., 2009 | Quantitative | FACT-B (Physical, Emotional, Functional, Social/Family, Breast Concerns) | Low-acculturated and high-acculturated Latinas reported significantly lower physical well-being and more breast-specific concerns than non-Latina White women. Low-acculturated Latinas also reported significantly lower scores on functional well-being, emotional well-being, and social well-being compared to non-Latina Whites, who did not differ from high-acculturated Latinas. In the final model which included all covariates, Latinas low in acculturation reported significantly lower functional well-being and emotional well-being than non-Latina Whites, and more breast-specific concerns than non-Latina Whites, but did not significantly differ on physical and social well-being. Low-acculturated Latinas reported lower levels of functional and emotional well-being than Latinas high in acculturation and Black women. |
| Cross-sectional | |||
| Maly et al., 2010 | Quantitative | *Self-reported symptoms and self-reported symptom resolution (nausea/vomiting, pain, depressive symptoms) | In analyses controlling for covariates, both less-acculturated and more-acculturated Latinas were significantly more likely to report having experienced nausea than non-Latina Whites. Less acculturated Latinas were significantly less likely to report having experienced pain than non-Latina White women. Latinas did not significantly differ from non-Latina Whites on depressive symptoms. Less-acculturated Latinas were significantly less likely to perceive depressive symptom resolution than non-Latina White women in the unadjusted and adjusted models. Latinas were less likely that non-Latina Whites to perceive pain resolution; however, no differences emerged on the resolution of nausea or pain in the adjusted models. |
| Cross-sectional | |||
| Maly et al., 2008 | Quantitative | SF-36 (all subscales) | Latinas reported poorer QOL compared to non-Latina Whites. With control variables entered in the structural equation model, non-Latina ethnic status was directly associated with better QOL. |
| Cross-sectional | CES-D | ||
| STAI | |||
| Breast Cancer Specific Anxiety | |||
| Yoon et al., 2008 | Quantitative | * Physical symptoms (nausea/vomiting, difficulty sleeping, arm problems, vaginal dryness, hot flashes) | After controlling for covariates, Spanish-speaking Latinas were approximately 60% less likely to report having any severe cancer-related symptoms than non-Latina White women, who did not differ from English-speaking Latinas. English-speaking Latinas were significantly less likely to report hot flashes and that Spanish-speaking Latinas were significantly less likely to report difficulty sleeping than non-Latina Whites. |
| Cross-sectional |
Ashing Giwa et al., 2007, and Ashing Giwa et al., 2009 are the same data set and Lim et al., 2009 is an overlapping dataset. Carver et al. (2005) and Carver et al. (2006) used the same data set. Spencer et al., 1999, Carver et al, 2003 and Petronis et al., 2003 are overlapping data sets. Scales with reported alphas ranged from .70 to .96
*Author constructed scale. No other information on scale provided
+QOL only measured at 1 time point
CES-D Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression; SF-36 Rand Short-Form 36; CARES Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System; BCPT Breast Cancer Prevention Trial Symptom Checklist; POMS Profile of Mood States; MSAS-SF Memorial Symptoms Assessment Scale – Short Form; QLACS Quality of Life in Adult Cancer Survivors; FACT Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy. FACT-G (general cancer), and FACT-B (breast cancer specific) are the same measure except FACT-B contains an additional measure of breast cancer specific QOL; IES Impact of Event Scale; STAI-S State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; ABS Affects Balance Scale; SIP Sickness Impact Profile; SQOL Self-Rated Quality of Life; PCBC Profile of Concerns about Breast Cancer; QOL Quality of Life; PAIS Psychological Adjustment to Illness Scale; PFS Piper Fatigue Scale; BCPC Breast Cancer Problems Checklist; BPI Brief Pain Inventory; DAS Dyadic Adjustment Scale