Abstract
BACKGROUND
In Palestine, persons older than 60 years of age comprise 4.6% of the population in this decade and will remain relatively stable until the year 2020, when it is expected to begin to rise. The quality of life (QoL), which reflects well-being and health status, is under-reported in this vulnerable group in the Gaza Strip.
OBJECTIVE
Determine QoL and associated factors in persons aged older than 60 years.
DESIGN
A community-based cross-sectional study.
SETTING
Five Gaza Strip governorates.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS
Subjects were selected by convenience sampling. We used the validated Arabic WHOQOL-BREF to assess QoL and used descriptive, univariate and multivariate methods to analyze the data.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
QoL, overall satisfaction with health and factors associated with good QoL.
SAMPLE SIZE
235 community-dwelling elderly.
RESULTS
The response rate was 85.5% (201/235). Mean age (SD) was 69 (7.95) years old and females accounted for 57.7% (116/201) of the sample. Almost half (44.2%, 90/201) of the elderly scored in the category of good QoL. The mean (SD) for overall QoL and perceived satisfaction with health was 3.3 (1.1) and 3.4 (1.0), respectively, on a 5-point Likert scale. The social relationship domain had the highest QoL score (65.4 [15.3]), whereas physical and environmental domains received equally lower scores (60.5 [15.2] and 60.5 [12.5] respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that factors associated with good QoL were higher education (OR: 3.1, CI 95%: 1.03–9.4) and perceived high satisfaction with health (OR: 3.6, CI 95%: 1.8–7.3).
CONCLUSION
More years of education and higher satisfaction with health were associated with a better perception of QoL. Interventions should be focused more on physical and environmental aspects in the life of elderly persons.
LIMITATIONS
Cross-sectional design, use of convenience sample and some possibly important factors not studied.
Aging is a natural process exemplified by changes in physical, mental and social conditions. The increasing size of the population over the age of 60 years is part of a demographic transition throughout the world in both developed and developing countries, including Palestine. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), the 60 and over age group will reach 1.2 billion and 2 billion by 2025 and 2050, respectively.1 For Palestine, persons older than 60 years of age comprise 4.6% of total population; this percentage will stay relatively low and will not rise during the current decade, but is projected to increase after 2020, reaching 7.7% by 2050.2
Most of the Arabic population share similar cultural backgrounds, founded mainly from religion, but they are not a homogenous group. The elderly in Palestine continue to rely on the family as the primary source for care and have traditionally tended to live with their offspring and grandchildren. Respect for old people is an important value, and is a moral obligation per the holy book “Koran”. Palestinian elders keep the heritage alive and are provided opportunities to be actively involved and participate in social activities
Quality of Life (QoL) is a broad term that reflects the health status and well-being of a group, and is used interchangeably with the term health-related quality of life (HRQOL). QoL covers several domains such as physical health and psychosocial status, social and environmental relationships, level of autonomy and individual belief.3 It is a multifaceted, valued and subjective term and is an important indicator in gerontology and geriatrics including nursing care.4 QoL in the elderly is influenced by determinants specific to older age, including but not limited to, social roles and support, fluctuation of physical health status and coping with challenges brought on by aging.5 Personal characteristics, demographic variables, socioeconomic, and self-value are predictors of QoL.6,7 In addition, low economic status, low education level and healthcare status as well as poor social interaction result in poor QoL.8,9
Many initiatives have been launched to promote healthy aging. Among these are “Active Living”, “In Porto Life is Long” and the “Wellness Project” in Canada, Portugal and Italy, respectively,10 and the Guidelines for the Pact for Health in Brazil.11 Various validated tools are used to assess QoL. Some are broad measures like the World Health Organization Quality of Life Bref (WHOQOL-BREF), health-related measures such as the SF-36, and/or disease specific measures, such as the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QOL questionnaire.12 QoL was previously assessed among different population groups in Palestine, including healthy and unhealthy ones, but none have targeted those in the vulnerable group over the age 60 years. Therefore, this study is unique and was conducted to assess QoL in community-dwelling elders residing in the Gaza Strip and to determine factors associated with good QoL.
SUBJECTS AND METHODS
This was an analytical cross-sectional and community-based study conducted in the five governorates of the Gaza Strip in the southwestern part of Palestine. A convenience sample of community-dwelling elders were interviewed from the five Gaza Strip governorates. Elderly who were older than 60 years, cooperative, Arabic speaking and willing to participate were included in the study. Unconscious, bedridden, hospitalized and mentally diseased elders were excluded.
Prior the interview sessions, the study aim and objectives were explained and verbal consent was obtained in presence of the participant’s partner or carer. Privacy, voluntary participation, autonomy and confidentiality were also emphasized. The research committee of Israa University approved the study proposal. Data were stored in a closet that belongs to first author, and will be kept for at least 3 years and then discarded.
We used the Arabic WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire, which was translated and validated by El Jedi et al.13 It consists of 26 questions, 24 of which are divided into four domains: physical health (perception of the individual regarding one’s physical condition, 7 items), social relationships (perception of individual social relationships and social roles adopted in life, 3 items), environment (perception of the individual regarding diverse aspects related to the environment in which one lives, 8 items) and psychological health (perception of individual affective and cognitive condition, 6 items). The remaining two questions measure self-perceived QoL and satisfaction with health. All questions are rated on a 5-point Likert scale (1=very bad/strongly dissatisfied to 5=very good/strongly satisfied). Additional variables were added to assess socio-economic, demographic and health conditions of the elderly.
Data collection was carried out by 15 undergraduate nursing female students from the Faculty of Health Professions, Israa University. Data were collected using a face-to-face interviews from 15 February to 5 April 2018. Data collectors received three hours of training on communication skills, study aim and objectives, questionnaire items, and potential areas for misconception. The mean time to complete the questionnaire was 17 minutes.
Data were analyzed in IBM SPSS version 22. Descriptive analysis of data included calculation of mean and standard deviation for continuous variables, and frequency, percentage, minimum and maximum values for categorical variables. Each question was rated from 1 to 5, then the score was transformed to a linear scale ranging from 0–100. The higher the score the better QoL as perceived by the elderly. There is no clear cut-off to determine “good” from “bad” QoL or feeling satisfied with health. However, it was decided to classify subjects into those who gave a score of 1, 2 or 3 (poor QoL/unsatisfied feeling with health) and those who gave a score of 4 or 5 (good QoL/satisfactory feeling with health). In statistical modeling, univariate analysis was performed to determine which of a wide number of independent variables to consider in the multivariate model using P<.250 because the frequently used P≤.05 usually fails to capture significant variables.14 In the multivariate analysis, a critical value P<.05 was considered statistically significant and values were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).
RESULTS
Two hundred one elderly (85.5%), living in residency area of data collectors, completed the questionnaire. Table 1 summarizes the socioeconomic, demographic and clinical characteristics of the elderly. The mean age (SD) was 69.1 (8.0) years and 116 (57.7%) were female. Three-quarters were married and the majority (77.1%) suffered from chronic diseases. About one-fifth (22.9%) and one-third (35.3%) were retired and depended on social support. At least 80% (160/201) had an income less than 300 USD monthly.
Table 1.
Baseline characteristics of respondents.
| Variables | Total (N=201) | Male (n=85) | Female (n=116) | X2 | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Age groups | 1.249 | .264 | |||
| 60–69 years | 121 (60.2) | 55 (64.7) | 66 (56.9) | ||
| ≥70 years | 80 (39.8) | 30 (35.3) | 50 (43.1) | ||
| Education | 17.874 | <.001 | |||
| Illiterate | 63 (31.3) | 16 (18.8) | 47 (40.5) | ||
| Up to preparatory | 65 (32.3) | 28 (32.9) | 37 (31.9) | ||
| Up to secondary school | 47 (23.5) | 22 (25.9) | 25 (21.6) | ||
| University | 26 (12.9) | 19 (22.4) | 7 (6.0) | ||
| Marital status | 35.863 | <.001 | |||
| Married | 130 (64.7) | 75 (88.2) | 55 (47.4) | ||
| Widowed | 71 (35.3) | 10 (11.8) | 61 (52.6) | ||
| Health problem | 0.035 | .852 | |||
| Yes | 155 (77.1) | 65 (76.5) | 90 (77.6) | ||
| No | 46 (22.9) | 20 (23.5) | 26 (22.4) | ||
| Health problems | 7.028 | .318 | |||
| Diabetes mellitus | 11 (7.1) | 3 (4.6) | 8 (8.9) | ||
| Hypertension | 25 (16.1) | 11 (16.9) | 14 (15.6) | ||
| Heart disease | 3 (1.9) | 2 (3.1) | 1 (1.1) | ||
| Joint pain | 3 (1.9) | 0 (0.0) | 3 (3.3) | ||
| Cancer | 2 (1.3) | 2 (3.1) | 0 (0.0) | ||
| Compound (at least two health problems) | 81 (52.3) | 33 (50.8) | 48 (53.3) | ||
| Others | 30 (19.4) | 14 (21.5) | 16 (17.8) | ||
| Source of income | 13.657 | .008 | |||
| Retired | 46 (22.9) | 27 (31.8) | 19 (16.4) | ||
| Social support | 71 (35.3) | 25 (29.4) | 46 (39.6) | ||
| Depend on sons | 54 (26.8) | 16 (18.8) | 38 (32.8) | ||
| Private work | 17 (8.5) | 11 (12.9) | 6 (5.2) | ||
| No income | 13 (6.5) | 6 (7.1) | 7 (6.0) | ||
| Income groups | 6.823 | .033 | |||
| <150 USD | 78 (38.8) | 25 (29.4) | 53 (45.7) | ||
| 150–300 USD | 82 (40.8) | 37 (43.5) | 45 (38.8) | ||
| >300 USD | 41 (20.4) | 23 (27.1) | 18 (15.5) | ||
| Place of residence | 8.140 | .087 | |||
| North Gaza | 37 (18.4) | 14 (16.5) | 23 (19.8) | ||
| Gaza city | 100 (49.8) | 50 (58.8) | 50 (43.1) | ||
| Middle area | 23 (11.4) | 9 (10.6) | 14 (12.1) | ||
| Khan younis | 26 (12.9) | 10 (11.7) | 16 (13.8) | ||
| Rafah | 15 (7.5) | 2 (2.4) | 13 (11.2) | ||
Data are number (percentage). USD: United States currency.
Quality of life and feeling satisfaction with health
The mean score (SD) for perceived QoL and satisfaction with health was 3.3 (1.1) and 3.4 (1.0), respectively. The mean score for social relationships was comparatively higher than the remaining three domains (65.4 [15.3]). Females reported a higher score than males for both the overall QoL and perceived satisfaction with health. However, statistical significance was only for satisfaction with health (P=.03). On the four domains of QoL, males reported higher scores for physical and social relationships, but only the physical health domain (P=.031) was statistically significant (Table 2).
Table 2.
Quality of life among elderly in WHOQOL-BREF domains.
| Domain | Total N=201 | Male (n=85) | Female (n=116) | t | P value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |||
|
| ||||||||
| General QoL | 3.3 | 1.1 | 3.2 | 1.1 | 3.3 | 1.0 | −1.162 | .247 |
| Satisfaction on health | 3.4 | 1.0 | 3.3 | 1.2 | 3.6 | 0.9 | −2.181 | .030 |
| Physical health | 60.5 | 15.2 | 63.2 | 16.6 | 58.5 | 13.9 | 0.056 | .031 |
| Psychological health | 63.8 | 12.4 | 56.6 | 12.9 | 62.6 | 12.0 | 0.246 | .101 |
| Social relationship | 65.4 | 15.3 | 67.3 | 15.5 | 63.8 | 15.2 | 0.867 | .137 |
| Environmental | 60.5 | 12.5 | 60.3 | 14.0 | 60.6 | 11.4 | 0.032 | .903 |
Statistical analysis
The QoL in elderly was categorized into: good QoL (score ≥4) and poor QoL (score <4). More than half of the participants (55.2%) had poor QoL. The crude univariate analysis indicated nine independent factors for multivariate logistic regression: male gender (OR: 0.7, 95CI%: 0.4–1.2), type of education (OR: 4.2; 95 CI%: 1.5–11.8), no health problem (OR: 2.6; 95 CI%: 1.3–5.2), source of income (OR: 3.8; 95 CI%: 0.8–18.1), income group (OR: 3.1; 95 CI%: 1.4–6.9), place of residence (OR: 3.4; 95 CI%: 0.9–13.4) and feeling of satisfaction with health (OR: 3.9, 95 CI%: 2.1–7.4) (Table 3). In the multivariate logistic regression, education and feeling of satisfaction with health were significantly associated with good QoL (P<.05) (Table 4). More years of education (Wald X2: 4.7, OR: 3.1; CI 95%: 1.030–9.4), and higher satisfaction with health (Wald X2: 13.5, OR: 3.6; CI 95%: 1.8–7.3) were associated with a better perception of QoL.
Table 3.
Factors associated with good quality of life.
| Variables | Total (N=201) | Poor (n=111) | Good (n=90) | OR with 95% CI | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| Gender | Male | 85 (42.3) | 52 (46.8) | 33 (36.7) | 0.7 (0.4–1.2) | .146 |
| Female | 116 (57.7) | 59 (53.2) | 57 (63.3) | Ref. | ||
| Age groups | 60–69 | 121 (60.2) | 69 (62.2) | 52 (57.8) | 0.8 (0.5–1.5) | .528 |
| 70 or more | 80 (39.8) | 42 (37.8) | 38 (42.2) | Ref. | ||
| Education | University | 26 (12.9) | 6 (5.4) | 20 (22.2) | 4.2 (1.5–11.8) | .007 |
| Up to secondary school | 47 (23.4) | 33 (29.7) | 14 (15.6) | 0.5 (0.2–1.2) | .120 | |
| Up to preparatory | 65 (32.3) | 37 (33.3) | 28 (31.1) | 0.9 (0.5–1.9) | .876 | |
| Illiterate | 63 (31.3) | 35 (31.5) | 28 (31.1) | Ref. | ||
| Marital status | Married | 130 (64.7) | 69 (62.2) | 61 (67.8) | 0.8 (0.4–1.4) | .408 |
| Widowed | 71 (35.3) | 42 (37.8) | 29 (32.2) | Ref. | ||
| Health problem | No | 46 (22.9) | 17 (15.3) | 29 (32.2) | 2.6 (1.3–5.2). | |
| Yes | 155 (77.1) | 94 (84.7) | 61 (67.8) | Ref | .005 | |
| Satisfaction on health | Satisfied | 128 (63.7) | 56 (50.5) | 72 (80.0) | 3.9 (2.1–7.4) | .002 |
| Not satisfied | 73 (36.3) | 55 (49.5) | 18 (20.0) | Ref | ||
| Source of income | No income at all | 13 (6.5) | 7 (6.3) | 6 (6.7) | Ref. | |
| Retired | 46 (22.9) | 14 (12.6) | 32 (35.6) | 2.7 (0.8–9.4) | .127 | |
| Social support | 71 (35.3) | 54 (48.6) | 17 (18.9) | 0.4 (0.1–1.2) | .107 | |
| Depend on sons | 54 (26.9) | 32 (28.8) | 22 (24.4) | 0.8 (0.2–2.7) | .723 | |
| Private work | 17 (8.5) | 4 (3.6) | 13 (14.4) | 3.8 (0.8–18.1) | .095 | |
| Income groups | > 300 USD | 41 (20.4) | 13 (11.7) | 28 (31.1) | 3.1 (1.4–6.9) | .005 |
| 150–300 USD | 82 (40.8) | 52 (46.8) | 30 (33.3) | 0.8 (0.4–1.6) | .565 | |
| < 150 USD | 78 (38.8) | 46 (41.4) | 32 (35.6) | Ref. | ||
| Place of residence | North | 37 (18.4) | 17 (15.3) | 20 (22.2) | 0.6 (0.1–2.1) | .389 |
| Gaza | 100 (49.8) | 59 (53.2) | 41 (45.6) | 3.4 (0.9–13.4) | .076 | |
| Middle area | 23 (11.4) | 7 (6.3) | 16 (17.8) | 1 (0.3–3.2) | .941 | |
| Khan younis | 26 (12.9) | 19 (17.1) | 7 (7.8) | 1.8 (0.5–6) | .361 | |
| Rafah | 15 (7.5) | 9 (8.1) | 6 (6.7) | Ref. | ||
Data are number (percentage).
Table 4.
Multivariate analysis for overall quality of life.
| B | S.E. | Wald | P value | OR | 95% CI OR | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | ||||||
|
| |||||||
| Education | 12.9 | .005 | |||||
| University | 1.1 | 0.6 | 4.1 | .044 | 3.1 | 1.03 | 9.4 |
| Up to secondary school | −1.0 | 0.4 | 4.7 | .030 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.9 |
| Up to preparatory | −0.3 | 0.4 | 0.6 | .430 | 0.7 | 0.3 | 1.6 |
| No health problem | 0.6 | 0.4 | 2.4 | .121 | 1.8 | 0.9 | 3.9 |
| High satisfaction with health | 1.3 | 0.4 | 13.5 | <.001 | 3.6 | 1.8 | 7.3 |
| Constant | 0.269 | 0.3 | 9.4 | .002 | 0.4 | ||
DISCUSSION
In this study, we investigated the QoL of elderly Palestinians using the Arabic WHOQOL-BREF questionnaire. The questionnaire has been verified to be an appropriate tool for assessing QoL and HRQOL globally,15 regionally,16 and locally among Gazans exposed to war.17,18 QoL was previously measured in Palestine among different age groups but not the elderly.19–21 Therefore, the study targeted a neglected portion of Palestinian community. The elderly are a special group of population with special needs because of the potential for sickness and changes in psychosocial status. The Palestinian community is a youthful society: persons under 15 years old constitute 42% of the population while the elderly are 4.6% of the population. Little attention is given to this vulnerable group in terms of advanced health and psychosocial programs. Usually, the elderly are provided with basic health services and necessary healthcare and are covered by the insurance of their employed sons and/or by social care or from the retirement council. It is noteworthy to mention that this group like others has been exposed to three consecutive wars in the last six years and are living under the siege imposed on the Gaza Strip, which seriously threatens the availability and sustainability of many health services.
In our study, the mean perceived QoL was 3.3 (1.1) and the mean perceived of satisfaction with health was 3.4 (1.0) on a 5-point Likert scale. The reported scores are favorably higher than other studies from India,22,23 Iran,24,25 Slovakia,26 and Brazil,27 but are lower than the United States28 and Canada.29 Among the WHOQOL-BREF domains, the social relationship had the highest score, which means that elders are socially-adapted to their surrounding environment. A study conducted by Oliveira and colleagues30 showed clear evidence of association between “social relationship” and “better QOL”. The same study revealed that the stronger the social relationship the lower risk for depression and better mental health in elderly. Moreover, strong social relationships reflect the socio-cultural position that elderly Palestinians possess. As a Muslim community, respect and holiness are given to older people while culturally it is unacceptable to keep them in nursing homes. It is unusual to send them to long-stay care facilities and thus they remain under family care.
The “physical health” domain received the lowest score. Many studies confirmed this result, which could be attributed to the presence of chronic diseases and appearance of persistent pain that inhibits daily activity, performance, and independency.31,32 In our study, 77% of the examined elderly had at least one health problem. The “environment” domain received a low score, which indicates few opportunities for new information, gaining skills, leisure activities and fewer financial resources. Males reported higher scores than females. However, statistical significance was only seen with physical domain, which is compatible with previous findings,33,34 but not with Gholami et al.35 Similar findings were also reported for social domain.23,36 A difference in scores between males and females is expected and could be attributed to the psychological nature of the sexes and socioeconomic status and sociodemographic characteristics. This variation is documented by Robert and colleagues37 and Tesfay and colleagues.38
The elderly who reported satisfaction with their health had better QoL. Many studies documented similar results.39,40 Therefore, public health, including health prevention and promotion programs, are necessary and can improve functional ability and social interactions to offer a better QoL. Higher education was a predictor for good QoL. The same finding has been reported from Iran, Turkey, Brazil and Taiwan.41–44 The educated elderly may have a potential to learn more and gain skills and knowledge that promote adaptation and prevent further complications from diseases that influence physical ability and other functions.
This study has many limitations: 1) the nature of the cross-sectional design, which limits the causal interpretation of results; 2) the convenience sample (not randomized), which makes it difficult to generalize the result. The sample size was not large enough to represent the population; 3) some possibly important independent factors may have been excluded such as depression and anxiety, memory problems, cognitive level, and ADL function.
In conclusion, this study provides a useful information with regard to factors associated with good QoL among elderly Palestinians. Knowing The QOL and its predictors is becoming crucial in order to elucidate the problems of the aging generation, and being familiar with these determinants could be helpful to initiate QoL improvement programs. Overall, the QoL and satisfaction with health were in average. Higher education and higher satisfaction with health are predictors for good QoL. There is a need to take actions to ensure enhancements in health promotion and disease prevention and particular attention should be given to issues of elderly’s environment and physical aspect of life.
Acknowledgment
The authors are grateful to nursing students (4th years) of Israa University, Gaza Strip, Palestine for their help in data collection. Many thanks to Dr. Robert Spencer for his contribution in editing this manuscript.
Footnotes
Funding: None.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None.
Author contributions
AE, MR and EA were responsible for the design of the study and doing a literature AM was responsible for data analysis and interpretation of results. AE wrote the manuscript. MR, EA and AM revised and edited the draft. All authors did again critically revised and approved the final manuscript.
Declaration
Supporting data are available with the first author.
REFERENCES
- 1.World Health Organisation. Active ageing: a policy framework. Geneva: WHO; 2002. [accessed 22/06/2018]. Available from: http://www.who.int/ageing/publications/active_ageing/en/ [Google Scholar]
- 2.Palestinian Information Center. Elderly in Palestine. Ramallah: [accessed 22/06/2018]. Available at: https://english.palinfo.com/news/2017/10/1/Elderly-people-in-Palestine-represent-4-6-of-total-population. [Google Scholar]
- 3.World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL) Position paper from the World Health Organization. Social Science & Medicine. 1995;41(10):1403–1409. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00112-k. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Farský I, Ondrejka I, Žiaková K. Problematika kvality života v séniu. Martin: Profa; 2007. (in Slovak) [Google Scholar]
- 5.Gurková E. Pro klinickou praxi a o?et?ovatelsk? v?skum. Praha: Grada Publishing; 2011. Hodnocení kvality života. (in Czech) [Google Scholar]
- 6.Forjaz MJ, Rodriguez-Blazquez C, Ayala A, Rodriguez-Rodriguez V, de Pedro-Cuesta J, Garcia-Gutierrez S, Prados-Torres A. Chronic conditions, disability, and quality of life in older adults with multimorbidity in Spain. Eur J Int Med. 2015;26(3):176–181. doi: 10.1016/j.ejim.2015.02.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Bilgili N, Arpaci F. Quality of life in older adults in Turkey. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2014;59(2):415–421. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2014.07.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Bussche HV, Koller D, Kolonko T, Hansen H, Wegscheider K, Glaeske G, et al. Which chronic diseases and disease combinations are specific to multi morbidity in the elderly? Results of claims data based cross-sectional study in Germany. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:101. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Mellor D, Russo S, McCabe MP, Davison TE, George K. Depression training program for caregivers of elderly care recipients: implementation and qualitative evaluation. J Gerontol Nurs. 2008;34(9):8–17. doi: 10.3928/00989134-20080901-09. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Benedetti TRB, Borges LJ, Petroski EL, Gonçalves LHT. Atividade física e estado de saúde mental de idosos. Rev Saude Publica. 2008;42(2):302–307. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Ministério da Saúde (Brazil) Diário Oficial da União. 2006. Portaria 399/GM de 22 de fevereiro 2006. Divulga o Pacto pela Saúde 2006 - Consolidação do SUS e aprova as Diretrizes Operacionais do Referido Pacto. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Hambleton P, Keeling S, McKenzie M. The jungle of quality of life: Mapping measures and meanings for elders. Australas J Ageing. 2009;28(1):3–6. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-6612.2008.00331.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Eljedi A, Mikolajczyk RT, Kraemer A, Laaser U. Health-related quality of life in diabetic patients and controls without diabetes in refugee camps in the Gaza strip: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2006;6:268. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-6-268. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Mickey R, Greenland S. The impact of confounder selection criteria on effect estimation. Am J Epidemiol. 1989;129:125. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115101. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Zhu Y, Liu J, Qu B1. Psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the WHOQOL-HIV BREF to assess quality of life among people living with HIV/AIDS: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2017;21(7):e016382. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016382. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Ohaeri JU, Awadalla AW. The reliability and validity of the short version of the WHO Quality of Life Instrument in an Arab general population. Ann Saudi Med. 2009;29:98–104. doi: 10.4103/0256-4947.51790. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Thabet AA, Thabet SS. Stress, Trauma, Psychological Problems, Quality of Life, and Resilience of Palestinian Families in the Gaza Strip. J Clin Psychiatr. 2015;1:11–27. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Mataria A, Giacaman R, Stefanini A, Naidoo N, Kowal P, Chatterji S. The Quality of Life of Palestinians under a Chronic Political Conflict: Assessment and Determinants. Economic Research Forum. 2008 Aug; doi: 10.1007/s10198-008-0106-5. Paper No: 428. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Abuawad MSS. Assessing quality of life of Palestinian diabetic patients; refugees and non-refugees : UNRWA and MOH health centers attendants. Master thesis. 2013. Available at: https://oda.hioa.no/nb/assessing-quality-of-life-of-palestinian-diabetic-patients-refugees-and-non-refugees-unrwa-and-moh-health-centers-attendants.
- 20.Khatib ST, Hemadneh MK, Hasan SA, Khazneh E, Zyoud SH. Quality of life in hemodialysis diabetic patients: a multicenter cross-sectional study from Palestine. BMC Nephrol. 2018;19:49. doi: 10.1186/s12882-018-0849-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Massad SG, Nieto FG, Palta M, Smith M, Clark R, Thabet A. Health-related quality of life of Palestinian preschoolers in the Gaza Strip: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:253. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-253. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Sowmiya KR, Nagarani A Study on quality of life of elderly population in Mettupalayam, a rural area of Tamil Nadu. Nat J Res Com Med. 2012;1(3):139–43. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Hameed S, Brahmbhatt KR, Patil DC, Prasanna KS, Jayaram S. Quality Of life among the geriatric population in a rural area of Dakshina Kannada, Karnataka, India. G J Med Public Health. 2014;3(3):1–5. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Cheraghi Z, Doosti-Irani A, Nedjat S. Quality of Life in Elderly Iranian Population Using the QOL-brief Questionnaire: A Systematic Review. Iran J Public Health. 2016;45(8):978–985. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Farajzadeh M, Gheshlagh RG, Sayehmiri K. Health Related Quality of Life in Iranian Elderly Citizens: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. IJCBNM. 2017;5(2):100–111. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Soósová MS. Determinants of quality of life in the elderly. Cent Eur J Nurs Midw. 2016;7(3):484–493. [Google Scholar]
- 27.Miranda LC, Soares SM, Silva PA. Quality of life and associated factors in elderly people at a Reference Center. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2016;21(11):3533–3544. doi: 10.1590/1413-812320152111.21352015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Baernholdt M. Factors associated with quality of life in older adults in the United States. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(3):527–534. doi: 10.1007/s11136-011-9954-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Lisiane M, Paskulin G, Molzahn A. Quality of Life of Older Adults in Canada and Brazil. West J Nurs Res. 2007;29(1):10–26. doi: 10.1177/0193945906292550. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Oliveira ERA, Gomes MJ, Paiva KM. Institutionalization and quality of life in elderly at metropolitan region in Vitória – ES, Brazil – ES. Esc Anna Nery. 2011 Jul-Set;15(3) [Google Scholar]
- 31.Cunha LL, Mayrink WC. Influence of chronic pain in the quality of life of the elderly. Rev Dor. 2011;12(2):120–124. [Google Scholar]
- 32.Lung FW, Huang YL, Shu BC, Lee FY. Parenteral rearing style, premorbid personality, mental health and quality of life in chronic regional pain: A causal analysis. Compr Psychiatry. 2004;45(3):206–12. doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2004.02.009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Vitorino LM, Paskulin LM, Vianna LA. Quality of life among older adults resident in long-stay care facilities. Rev Latino-Am Enfermagem. 2012;20(6):1186–95. doi: 10.1590/s0104-11692012000600022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Alencar NA, Aragão JC, Bezerra FMA, Dantas EHM. Avaliação da qualidade de vida em idosas residentes em ambientes urbano e rural. Rev Bras Geriatr Gerontol. 2010;13(1):103–109. http://revista.unati.uerj.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1809-98232010000100011&lng=pt. [Google Scholar]
- 35.Gholami A, Jahromi LM, Zarei E, Dehghan A. Application of WHOQOL-BREF in Measuring Quality of Life in Health-Care Staff. Int J Prev Med. 2013;4(7):809–817. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Barua A, Mangesh R, Kumar HN, Mathew S. A cross-sectional study on quality of life in geriatric population. Ind J Com Med. 2007;32(2):146–7. [Google Scholar]
- 37.Robert SA, Cherepanov D, Palta M, Dunham NC, Feeny D, Fryback DG. Socioeconomic status and age variations in health-related quality of life: Results from the national health measurement study. J Gerontol Series B: Psychol Sci and Soc Sci. 2009;64B(3):378–389. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbp012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Tesfay A, Gebremariam A, Gerbaba M, Abrha H. Gender Differences in Health Related Quality of Life among People Living with HIV on Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy in Mekelle Town, Northern Ethiopia. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015 doi: 10.1155/2015/516369. 516369. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Khaje-Bishak Y, Payahoo L, Pourghasem B, Jafarabadi MA. Assessing the Quality of Life in Elderly People and Related Factors in Tabriz, Iran. J Caring Sci. 2014;3(4):257–263. doi: 10.5681/jcs.2014.028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Onunkwor OF, Al-Dubai SA, George PP, Arokiasamy J, Yadav H, Barua A, et al. A cross-sectional study on quality of life among the elderly in non-governmental organizations’ elderly homes in Kuala Lumpur. Health Qual Life Out. 2016;14:6. doi: 10.1186/s12955-016-0408-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Hajian-Tilaki K, Heidari B, Hajian-TilakI A. Health Related Quality of Life and Its Socio-Demographic Determinants among Iranian Elderly People: a Population Based Cross-Sectional Study. J Caring Sci. 2017;6(1):39–47. doi: 10.15171/jcs.2017.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Ordu Gokkaya NK, Gokce-Kutsal Y, Borman P, Ceceli Dogan A, Eyigor S, Karapolat H. Pain and quality of life (QoL) in elderly: the Turkish experience. Arch Gerontol Geriat. 2012;55(2):367–62. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2011.10.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Alves LC, Leite lda C, Machado CJ. Factors associated with functional disability of elderly in Brazil: a multilevel analysis. Rev Saúde Pública. 2010;44(3):468–76. doi: 10.1590/s0034-89102010005000009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Tsai SY, Chi LY, Lee LS, Chou P. Health-related quality of life among urban, rural and island community elderly in Taiwan. J Formos Med Assoc. 2004;103(3):196–204. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]