RESEARCH PAPER
Quality of life and rural place of residence in Polish women – population based study
 
More details
Hide details
1
Department of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Medical University, Gdańsk, Poland
2
Department of Hygiene and Dietetics, Jagiellonian University, Medical College, Kraków, Poland
3
Department of Hygiene, Medical University, Poznań, Poland
 
Ann Agric Environ Med. 2011;18(2):429–432
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Objective: The purpose of this population-based study was to analyse the association between the health-related quality of life and rural residence among Polish females, including variables related to social environment and clinical characteristics. Methods: The snowball recruitment method was used to invite 1,560 women aged 45-60 to participate in the study. Participants received a questionnaire about demographic characteristics, environmental and work stress, use of anxiolytic-hypnotic medications and self-reported quality of life based on the SF-36 form. Univariate and multivariate analysis was carried out by means of a logistic regression model. Results: We found worse physical health and better mental health among women living in rural areas compared to those from urban settings. The rural residence was an independent predictor for poor physical health (below 25 percentile) odds ratio [OR] 1.6 95%, confidence interval [CI] 1.17-2.2). Living in rural areas was also associated at the borderline level of statistical significance, with reduction of risk of low quality of life in mental health (OR = 0.75; 95% CI = 0.55-1.02). According to other results from multivariate analysis, being retired, receiving social pension, long duration of illness symptoms, and consulting a medical specialist were the risk factors of reported bad physical health. Higher education and access to medical specialist protects against having a bad quality of life related to mental health. Being given the sack, stress at work, feeling anger, and long duration of symptoms are the risk factors of poor mental health. Conclusion: The rural residence is strongly associated with environmental and psychosocial factors in women aged 40-65.
 
REFERENCES (20)
1.
Brown J, Bowling A, Flynn TN. Models of quality of life: a taxonomy and systematic review of the literature. Report commissioned by European Forum on Population Ageing Research/ /Quality Life, University of Sheffi eld 2004.
 
2.
Romney D.M. A structural analysis of health related quality of life dimensions. Hum Relat 2002;45:165-176.
 
3.
Adler G, Young D, Galant R. A multicenter, open-label study to evaluate satisfaction and menopausal quality of life in women using transdermal estradiol/norethindrone acetate therapy for the management of menopausal signs and symptoms. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2005;59:212- 219.
 
4.
Freedman MA. Quality of life and menopause: the role of estrogen. J Women’s Health 2002;11:703-718. oi:10.1089/15409990260363661.
 
5.
Vaheri R, Akkila J, Kainulainen P. Quality of life, mood and sexual interest in women on long-term continuous combined hormone therapy. Climacteric 2005;8 (suppl. 2):214-215.
 
6.
Kolarzyk E. Premises for implementation of Polish national research of physical and mental components of life quality among women aged between 45 and 60 years. Probl Hig Epidemiol 2009;90:484-489.
 
7.
Etter JF, Perneger TV. Snowball sampling by mail: application to a survey of smokers in the general population. Int J Epidemiol 2000;29:43-48.
 
8.
Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. Th e MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). Med Care 1992;30:473-483.
 
9.
Morgan A. A national call to action: CDC’s 2001 urban and rural health chartbook. J Rural Health 2002;18:382-383.
 
10.
Krzyszkowski J. Diagnoza sytuacji społeczno-zawodowej kobiet wiejskich w Polsce. Ministerstwo Pracy i Polityki Społecznej. Departament do Spraw Kobiet, Rodziny i Przeciwdziałania Dyskryminacji, Warszawa 2008.
 
11.
Moore C, Probst J, Tompkins M, Cuff e S, Martin A. Poverty, stress, and violent Disagreements in the home among rural families. South Carolina Rural Health Research Center. 2005, Retrieved May 28, 2011 from http://rhr.sph.sc.edu.
 
12.
Probst JC, Moore CG, Baxley EG, Lammie JJ. Rural–urban diff erences in visits to primary care physicians. Fam Med 2002;34:609-615.
 
13.
Eberhardt MS, Pamuk ER. Th e importance of place of residence: examining health in rural and nonrural areas. Am J Public Health 2004;94:1682-1686.
 
14.
Filip RS, Zagorski J. Osteoporosis risk factors in rural and urban women from the Lublin Region of Poland. Ann Agric Environ Med 2005;12:21-26.
 
15.
Sygit K, Kołłątaj W, Sygit M, Kołłątaj B. Th e impact of economic factors on the realities of outpatient multi-drug treatment of chronic diseases in rural areas. Ann Agric Environ Med 2011;18:29-34.
 
16.
Mullie P, Guelinckx I. Cultural, socioeconomic and nutritional determinants of functional food consumption patterns.
 
17.
Probst J, Laditka S, Moore C, Harun N, Powell M. Depression in rural populations: Prevalence, eff ects on life quality, and treatment seeking behavior. Rural Health Research Center 2005. Retrieved May 27, 2011 from http://rhr.sph.sc.edu/report/S... Sum.pdf.
 
18.
Taylor HA, Hughes GD, Garrison RJ. Cardiovascular disease among women residing in rural America: epidemiology, explanations, and challenges. Am J Public Health. 2002;92: 548-551.
 
19.
Gacek M. Selected health habits of the group of women in the rural and urban environment according to their socio-economic and nutritional status. Probl Hig Epidemiol 2011;92:260-266 (in Polish).
 
20.
Gilbert LA. Women at midlife: current theoretical perspectives and research. Women & Th erapy 2003;14:105-115.
 
eISSN:1898-2263
ISSN:1232-1966