Skip to main content

Table 1 Socio- demographic and clinical characteristics of study participants and comparisons between the groups

From: Assessment of health-related quality of life in Turkish patients with facial prostheses

 

Patients with OP

Patients with AP

Patients with NP

Control group

P value

 

n=24

n=24

n=24

n=24

 

Characteristics

     

Age(years), Mean (SD)

55.83 ± 16.51

47.00 ± 14.28

61.04 ± 11.00

49.04 ± 9.49

0.001b

Monthly Family Income, TRYa, Mean (SD)

1125.00 ± 442.41

1005.00 ± 527.33

1258.33 ± 500.00

938.75 ± 445.97

0.111 b

Gender (n, %)

     

Female

13 (54.2)

10 (41.7)

13 (54.2)

11 (45.8)

0.771c

Male

11 (45.8)

14 (58.3)

11 (45.8)

13 (54.2)

 

Educational level (n, %)

     

≤ 8 years of schooling

9 (37.5)

11 (45.8)

9 (37.5)

5 (20.8)

0.326 c

>8 years of schooling

15 (62.5)

13 (54.2)

15 (62.5)

19 (79.2)

 

Marital status (n, %)

     

Married

9 (37.5)

10 (41.7)

11 (45.8)

16 (66.7)

0.184 c

Single, divorced, or widowed

15 (62.5)

14 (58.3)

13 (54.2)

13 (33.3)

 

Retention type of facial prosthesis (n, %)

     

Adhesive-retained

14 (58.3)

13 (54.2)

15 (62.5)

 

0.842 c

Implant-retained

10 (41.7)

11 (45.8)

9 (37.5)

  

Age of facial prosthesis (months), Mean (SD)

39.79±15.15

33.08±15.23

34.41±19.37

 

0.344 b

Reason for facial defect (n, %)

     

Trauma

7 (29.2)

9 (37.5)

8 (33.3)

 

0.829 c

Tumor resection

17 (70.8)

15 (62.5)

16 (66.7)

  
  1. SD, standard deviation; OP: orbital prosthesis; AP: auricular prosthesis; NP: nasal prosthesis.
  2. a Monthly Family Income measured in Turkish lira (TRY; 1 Turkish lira ≈ 0.42 EUR).
  3. b Statistical evaluation by the one-way ANOVA.
  4. c Statistical evaluation by the Pearson’s Chi- square test.