Another period of women s life: menopause and its impact on quality of life

Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: In this study it is aimed to determine the severity ofmenopause-related symptoms in premenopausal and menopausalwomen and their impact on quality of life.Methods: In this cross-sectional descriptive study, 300 womenbetween the ages of 40-65 admitted to departments of Obstetricsand Gynecology and Family Medicine were enrolled.

📊

Key Findings & Data:Aquestion-naire includingsocio-demographic data, Menopause SymptomScale (MRS) and the SF-36 Quality of Life Scalewereadministered.Womenwere classified into two groups as pre-menopausal andmenopausal period according to STRAW.Results: There were 57 (19.00%) participants in premenopausal,243 (81.00%) were in menopausal period.

💡

Conclusion & Impact:MRS scores and thequality of life subscores of role limitations-physical (rho=-.407,p

🔬Design:Research Article

📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample

⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: In this study it is aimed to determine the severity ofmenopause-related symptoms in premenopausal and menopausalwomen and their impact on quality of life.Methods: In this cross-sectional descriptive study, 300 womenbetween the ages of 40-65 admitted to departments of Obstetricsand Gynecology and Family Medicine were enrolled. Aquestion-naire includingsocio-demographic data, Menopause SymptomScale (MRS) and the SF-36 Quality of Life Scalewereadministered.Womenwere classified into two groups as pre-menopausal andmenopausal period according to STRAW.Results: There were 57 (19.00%) participants in premenopausal,243 (81.00%) were in menopausal period. The mean age of theparticipants was 53.7±6.1 and the mean age at menopause was47.7± 4.5. There was no significant difference between the MRStotal score between premenopausal participants (17.7±10.0) andthose of the menopause group (16.0±8.7) (p>0.05). There was nosignificant differences between premenopausal and menopausalwomen regarding the SF-36 scores (p>0.05). MRS scores and thequality of life subscores of role limitations-physical (rho=-.407,p

Özet

Amaç: Çalışmada menopoz öncesi ve menopoz dönemindeki kadınlarda menopozla ilişkili ortaya çıkan semptomların şiddeti veyaşam kalitesine etkisinin belirlenmesi amaçlandı.Yöntem: Kesitsel tanımlayıcı desendeki bu çalışmaya Kadın Hastalıkları ve Doğum ve Aile Hekimliği polikliniklerine başvuran 40-65yaş arasındaki 300 kadın alındı. Katılımcılara sosyo-demografik bilgileri içeren bir anket formunun yanı sıra, Menopoz İlişkili SemptomÖlçeği (MRS) ve SF-36 Yaşam Kalitesi Ölçeği uygulandı. Kadınlar,STRAW sınıflamasına göre menopoz öncesi ve menopoz dönemiolarak iki grup halinde değerlendirildi.Bulgular: Çalışmaya menopoz öncesi dönemde 57 (%19.0) ve menopozda 243 (%81.0) kadın katıldı. Yaş ortalaması 53.7±6.1 olankatılımcıların menopoza girme yaşı ortalaması 47.7± 4.5 idi. Menopoz öncesi dönemdeki katılımcılar (17.7±10.0) ile menopoz dönemindekilerin (16.0±8.7) MRS toplam puan ortalamaları arasında anlamlı bir fark yoktu (p>0.05). Menopoz öncesi ve menopoz dönemindeki kadınların SF-36 yaşam kalitesi skorları arasında da anlamlıbir fark saptanmadı (p>0.05). Katılımcıların MRS skorlarıyla yaşamkalitesi rol güçlüğü fiziksel (rho=-0.407; p

🔖

Cite This Article

Melih, Ş. E., COŞAR, E., ULUDAĞ, A., GENCER, M., ÇAKIR, A. N. G. (2022). Another period of women s life: menopause and its impact on quality of life. Türkiye Aile Hekimliği Dergisi, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 1, 25–30. https://ajindex.com/articles/626788

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

Open in New Tab ↗

↗New Tab

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (16)

Ertüngealp E, Seyisoğlu H. Menopoz ve Osteoporoz. İstanbul: Menopoz ve Osteoporoz Derneği Yayınları
Soules MR, Sherman S, Parrott E, et al. Executive summary: stages of reproductive aging workshop (STRAW). Menopause 2001
Research on the Menopause in the 1990's. Report of a WHO Scientific Group. WHO Technical Report Series 866 (WHO Geneva 1996). URL: (http://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/41841) Erişim tarihi 04.01.2013. 4.Lewis V. Undertreatment of menopausal symptoms and novel options for comprehensive management. Cur Med Res Opin 2009
Thurston R, Joffe H. Vasomotor symptoms and menopause: findings from the Study of Womens Health Across the Nation. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am 2011
Ferrand F, Hajri S, Benzineb S, et al. Comparative study of the quality of life associated with menopause in Tunisia and France. Menopause 2013
Thomas SE. Menopause knowledge and attitudes of English speaking Caribbean women: implication for health education. Californian J Health Promotion 2005
YanıkkeremE, OruçKoltanS, Göker TamayA, DikayakS. Relationship between women s attitude towards menopause and quality of life. Climacteric 2012
Schneider HP, Heinemann LA, Rosemeier HP, et al. The Menopause Rating Scale (MRS): reliability of scores of menopausal complaints. Climacteric 2000
Heinemann LA, Potthoff P, Schneider HP. International versions of the Menopause Rating Scale (MRS). Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003
Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36 item short form health survey (SF-36). I. Conseptual Framework and item selection. Med Care 1992
Koçyiğit H, Aydemir Ö, Ölmez N, Memiş A. Kısa form-36 Türkçe versiy- onunun güvenilirliği ve geçerliği. İlaç ve Tedavi Dergisi 1999
Nichols HB, Trentham-Dietz A, Hampton JM, et al. From menarche to menopause: trends among US women born from 1912 to 1969. Am J Epidemiol 2006
Moon-Soo Lee, Jong-Hun Kim, Man Sik Park, et al. Factors influencing the severity of menopause symptoms in Korean post-menopausal women. J Korean Med Sci 2010
Palacios S, Henderson VW, Siseles N, Tan D, Villaseca P. Age of menopause and impact of climacteric symptoms by geographical region. Climacteric 2010
Peeyananjarassri K, Cheewadhanaraks S, Hubbard M,et al. Menopausal symptoms in a hospital-based sample of women in southern Thailand. Climacteric 2006
Tokuç B, Kaplan PB, Balık