IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v32y1991i6p697-704.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Role retention and quality of life of bone marrow transplant survivors

Author

Listed:
  • Baker, Frank
  • Curbow, Barbara
  • Wingard, John R.

Abstract

Bone marrow transplantation (BMT) offers the potential for survival of 50% or more for selected patients with malignant disease not controlled by other means. However, BMT introduces risks for psychological, social, and physical impairment and the potential for significant loss in one's ability to retain important role relationships. While there has been a sharp increase in the performance of BMTs in the past decade, there has been little research on its effects on long-term survivors. This paper presents the results of a follow-up survey of 135 survivors of BMT at the Johns Hopkins Oncology center. The ability of the survivors to maintain valued social roles is examined as this affects perceived quality of life. The main hypothesis of the paper, that role retention is significantly related to higher quality of life, is supported by significant correlations of role retention with quality of life as measured by the Satisfaction with Life Domains Scale, current and future life satisfaction on Cantril Self-Anchoring Ladders, and by the Bradburn Positive Affect Scale. While the Bradburn Negative Affect Scale was not significantly related to role retention, total negative mood as measured by the Profile of Mood States was inversely related to role retention at a statistically significant level.

Suggested Citation

  • Baker, Frank & Curbow, Barbara & Wingard, John R., 1991. "Role retention and quality of life of bone marrow transplant survivors," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 697-704, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:32:y:1991:i:6:p:697-704
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(91)90149-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:32:y:1991:i:6:p:697-704. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.