The impact of social support on health related quality of life in persons with epilepsy
Introduction
Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological problems, affecting between 1% and 2% of the population. Although seizure freedom is the ultimate treatment goal, factors other than disease severity may have a significant influence on quality of life. Previous studies have found that psychosocial factors have the greatest impact on health-related quality of life (HRQOL), whereas clinical variables (age at onset, seizure frequency and side effects of antiepileptic drugs) did not significantly impact patients’ self ratings of HRQOL [1]. Although epilepsy severity is an important predictor of quality of life, some persons with epilepsy (PWE) are able to proceed with life relatively unencumbered despite uncontrolled seizures. It has been suggested previously that the persons most debilitated by epilepsy are not those with the highest seizure rates, but rather those who lack social support [2]. Higher education and occupational attainment are thought to modify the quality-of-life trajectory in epilepsy [3]. However, population studies from the United States show that persons with a history of epilepsy report lower educational attainment, lower household income, and poorer health status compared with those without epilepsy [4], [5].
Social support has been defined as “the commitment, caring advice and aid provided in personal relationships” [6]. Social support, especially physical and emotional comfort given by an intimate partner or from family and close friends, is thought to buffer the negative impact of stressful events, ongoing life strains, and chronic health conditions [7]. Social support serves several major functions: emotional support (expression of positive affect, empathetic understanding, and encouragement of expressions of feelings), informational support (advice and guidance with problem solving), instrumental support (providing tangible resources or financial support and practical help with activities of daily living), appraisal (comparing oneself with others), social companionship (spending of time with others in leisure or recreational activities), and affectionate support (expressions of love and affection) [8], [9].
Chronic illness requires daily readjustments that repeatedly interfere with day-to-day life and role-related activities (work, school, etc.). The positive effects of support or negative effects of a lack of support may also directly influence health [10]. Persons with low social support are more likely to suffer from various psychological and physical aliments [11]. Previous epidemiological studies have suggested that poor social support is a major risk factor for morbidity and mortality, with statistical effect sizes comparable to those of established risk factors such as cigarette smoking, hypertension, high cholesterol, obesity, and physical activity [12].
One epilepsy study found that 90% of the variance for self-rated HRQOL was explained by a combination of disease severity, epilepsy self-efficacy, social support, and locus of control [13]. Most importantly, social support was a mediator between disease severity and mastery, defined as patients’ general belief that they can control the course of life despite their epilepsy [13]. The more severe people perceive their disease to be, the less social support they will report receiving. The authors concluded that as social support decreases, HRQOL decreases. However, as social support increases, the sense of mastery increases, and hence, the person’s ability to cope with the limitations of their disease improves.
Previous studies of social support in PWE found that social support networks were restricted to family, neighbors, and health care providers [11]. In a recent prospective study, social support was a significant predictor of depressive symptoms at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months [14]. A small study comparing coping strategies in persons with drug-resistant epilepsy with seizure-free persons found no difference in the employment of social support strategies between the two groups [15]. A recent general population study examined the effects of social and emotional support on HRQOL [16]. However, no previous population studies have analyzed the association between social support and epilepsy. The goal of this study was to examine the effects of social support on HRQOL in persons with a history of epilepsy. Based on previous research, we hypothesized that PWE would be more likely to rate their levels of social support as poor. We hypothesized that this would result in poor HRQOL ratings compared with those for persons without epilepsy.
Section snippets
Methods
The California Health Interview Survey (CHIS) is a geographically stratified, random-digit-dialed, two-stage telephone survey conducted on a biennial state basis of noninstitutionalized persons in California over the age of 18. The CHIS functions as a source for monitoring specific health conditions such as heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes, and asthma, as well as for monitoring unhealthy behaviors and risk factors like tobacco and alcohol use and obesity. The topics, questionnaires,
Results
Social support was fairly well distributed demographically among four questions. Specific differences stand out; see Table 1, Table 2. Men reported higher levels of social support compared with women on three of the four questions. Caucasian populations reported higher levels of social support, and non-Caucasian populations tended to report poor social support. Persons completing college degrees reported greater levels of social support compared with those who had not graduated from high
Discussion
PWE who reported a lack of affectionate support from a close personal relationship in which they feel loved and wanted were significantly more likely to report fair/poor HRQOL. The social support questions are focused on perceived support. The CHIS does not differentiate whether the perceived support comes from family members or individuals outside of the family. However, affectionate support would likely come from a personal relationship rather than someone from a government institution. The
Conclusions
People with epilepsy who reported a lack of affectionate support, where they feel loved and wanted, were significantly more likely to report poor HRQOL. The strength of such a relationship demonstrates the detrimental effects of social isolation of PWE. Understanding the effects of poor social support on HRQOL is only the beginning. PWE need encouragement to actively seek and sustain supportive personal relationships that may help improve their HRQOL. In the clinical setting, PWE often engage
References (46)
- et al.
Quality-of-life trajectories in epilepsy: a review of the literature
Epilepsy Behav
(2008) - et al.
Health status and behavioral risk factors among persons with epilepsy in Ohio based on the 2006 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System
Epilepsy Behav
(2008) - et al.
Relationships among epilepsy, social stigma, self-esteem, and social support
J Epilepsy
(1992) - et al.
Individual, seizure-related, and psychosocial predictors of depressive symptoms among people with epilepsy over six months
Epilepsy Behav
(2009) - et al.
Coping strategies in epilepsy: 50 drug-resistant and 50 seizure-free patients
Seizure
(2007) - et al.
Prevalence of self-reported epilepsy in a multiracial and multiethnic community in New York City
Epilepsy Res
(2007) - et al.
The MOS social support survey
Soc Sci Med
(1991) - et al.
Health literacy, social support, and health status among older adults
Educ Gerontol
(2009) - et al.
Exercise, diet, health behaviors and risk factors among persons with epilepsy based on the California Health Interview Survey, 2005
Epilepsy Behav
(2008) Gender, marital status and the social control of health behavior
Soc Sci Med
(1992)
Further validation and reliability testing of the attitudes and beliefs about living with epilepsy (ABLE) components of the CDC epilepsy program instrument on stigma
Epilepsy Behav
Adjustment and coping in epilepsy
Seizure
Epilepsy and the family: a review of current literature
Seizure
Daily life in epilepsy: patients’ experiences described by emotions
Epilepsy Behav
Social functioning, psychological functioning, and quality of life in epilepsy
Epilepsia
The social support function in epilepsy self-help groups
Small Group Res
Epilepsy surveillance among adults—19 states, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2005
MMWR Surveill Summ
The impact of the family on health: the decade in review
J Marriage Fam
Social support as coping assistance
J Consult Clin Psychol
Work stress and social support
Social support and health
Social support and social cohesion
Social relationships and health
Science
Cited by (64)
Network analysis of the relationship between social support and quality of life in patients with epilepsy
2023, Epilepsy and BehaviorA framework for health equity in people living with epilepsy
2022, Epilepsy ResearchThe effects of self-management education and support on self-efficacy, self-esteem, and quality of life among patients with epilepsy: Self-management on self-efficacy, self-esteem and quality of life in patients with epilepsy
2022, SeizureCitation Excerpt :A study reported that two-day SM education for adults with uncontrolled epilepsy had no significant effects on QOL [48]. Another study reported psychosocial problems as the most important problems of the patients [49]. Therefore, efficient social activities and strong social support can significantly contribute to the acceptance of epilepsy and management of its psychosocial consequences among afflicted patients [49,50].
Peer support and social network groups among people living with epilepsy: A scoping review
2021, Epilepsy and BehaviorA feasibility study to assess social stress and social support in patients enrolled in a cannabidiol (CBD) compassionate access program
2021, Epilepsy and BehaviorCitation Excerpt :Social support, specifically, has been shown to both protect health and relieve some of the burden that stress places on individual health [28–30]. In PWE, research indicates that social support increases QoL scores and improves seizure control [22,31]. The opposite of social support, social isolation, indicates a disconnection from social relationships.
Classifying epilepsy pragmatically: Past, present, and future
2021, Journal of the Neurological SciencesCitation Excerpt :Depression, anxiety, and a lack of social connection with other individuals are common [126,129]. Provision of care appropriate to the specific concerns of people with epilepsy, psychosocial interventions to increase self-efficacy and locus of control, and measures to enhance social support may empower people with epilepsy [127,128]. Consideration of the effect of seven Tesla (7 T) magnetic resonance (MRI), next-generation sequencing (NGS), and artificial intelligence and machine learning on classification is required to reduce the fraction of unknown epilepsies and enhance the versatility of classification as future technological developments change clinical practice.