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.