RNCohortInternational nursing review2025

Trajectories of quality of life among disaster victims: A national longitudinal study.

Haeyoung Lee, Yujeong Kim

PMID 38953470

WHAT IT FOUND

Three years after disasters, 77 of 257 victims stayed at low quality of life.

Higher education, no disaster injury/illness, better self-rated health, more social support, and less social maladjustment were linked to staying in the high group.

Key findings

0177 participants (30.0%) followed a persistent low quality-of-life trajectory.

02180 participants (70.0%) followed a persistent high quality-of-life trajectory.

03Higher education (odds ratio 3.34), no disaster injury/illness (4.37), better subjective health (1.65), higher social support (1.04) and lower social maladjustment (0.88) were associated with higher odds of the persistent high quality-of-life trajectory.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

This was a secondary analysis of survey data, so it could not measure every factor that might affect quality of life. The analysis used only 257 respondents who completed all three years, so people who dropped out may have differed. Most participants were victims of natural disasters, so results may not apply to people affected by fires or other social disasters. The design was observational, so it cannot show that education, injury, self-rated health, social support or social maladjustment caused a better or worse quality-of-life trajectory. The sample was limited to adults who received government disaster pensions in South Korea, so it may not represent all disaster victims.

Declared interests

The authors declared no conflicts of interest. No funding source is given.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that nurse-led assessment or support will raise quality of life. This study observed groups over time and found associations. It did not test an intervention or show that changing any factor caused better quality of life.

Read it on PubMed →