Quality of life and coping strategies of outpatients with a depressive disorder in maintenance therapy – a cross-sectional study

Figures & data

Table 1 Description of the sample: demographic and clinical data

Variables	Frequencies or mean ± SD
Gender (M:F)	19:62
Age (years)	52.1±13.6
Age of disease onset (years)	42.3±12.8
Lifetime duration of treatment (years)	10.5±10.0
Number of hospitalizations	0.5±1.1
Psychiatric heredity	29
Same disorder	14
Other disorders	15
Without	52
Education
Elementary	5
Vocational training	19
Secondary school	40
University	17
Marital status
Single	11
Married	44
Divorced	21
Widowed	2
Incomplete data	3
Partner
No	24
Yes	54
Incomplete data	3
Employment
No	32
Yes	46
Incomplete data	3

Abbrevations: F, female; M, male.

Table 2 Mean scores of positive coping strategies according to SVF-78

Positive coping strategies	Mean ± SD
Underestimation	45.9±10.8
Guilt denial	54.2±11.3
Diversion	49.2±10.5
Alternative satisfaction	49.6±10.9
Situation control	47.5±11.9
Reaction control	51.2±10.4
Positive self-instruction	42.6±11.2
Need for social supporta	49.5±10.1
Using of positive coping	49.2±12.1

Note:

a The strategy need for social support is not strictly classified as positive or negative.

Abbreviation: SVF-78, Stress Coping Style Questionnaire.

Table 3 Mean scores of negative coping strategies according to SVF-78

Negative coping strategies	Mean ± SD
Active avoidancea	57.6±8.9
Escape tendency	59.9±9.1
Perseveration	56.0±9.0
Resignation	58.9±10.6
Self-accusation	54.6±10.9
Using of negative coping	60.4±10.3

Note:

a The strategy active avoidance is not strictly classified as positive or negative.

Abbreviation: SVF-78, Stress Coping Style Questionnaire.

Table 4 Relationship between coping strategies and demographic and clinical variables

Domain	Age	Onset	Length	objCGI	subjCGI
Underestimation	0.23*	0.22	−0.09	−0.20	−0.32**
Guilt denial	0.09	0.08	−0.08	−0.13	−0.22*
Diversion	−0.03	0.07	−0.24*	−0.15	−0.23*
Compensatory satisfaction	0.004	0.05	−0.13	−0.12	−0.18
Situation control	0.05	0.01	−0.06	−0.30**	−0.26*
Reaction control	0.10	0.05	−0.07	−0.20	−0.24*
Positive self-instruction	0.14	0.18	−0.15	−0.17	−0.26*
Need for social support	−0.13	−0.14	−0.04	−0.07	−0.07
Active avoidance	0.06	−0.07	−0.002	−0.01	0.02
Escape tendency	0.14	0.19	−0.16	0.19	0.25*
Perseveration	−0.03	−0.09	0.08	0.17	0.24*
Resignation	−0.002	−0.02	−0.02	0.22*	0.29**
Self-accusation	−0.16	−0.12	0.03	0.15	0.27*
Negative coping	−0.01	−0.01	−0.01	0.25*	0.36**
Positive coping	0.13	0.17	−0.19	−0.24*	−0.32**

Note:

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01, statistically significant data shown in bold.

Abbreviations: objCGI, (Clinical Global Impression) – objective; subjCGI, (Clinical Global Impression) – subjective.

Table 5 Quality of life in each domain (points/percentage)

Physical health (maximum 65 points)	39.5±9.9 (60.8)
Feelings (maximum 70 points)	48.0±10.6 (68.5)
Work (maximum 65 points)	35.9±19.4 (55.2)
Household (maximum 50 points)	36.8±10.0 (73.5)
School/study (maximum 50 points)	12.8±8.1 (25.6)
Leisure (maximum 30 points)	20.8±5.5 (69.3)
Social activities (maximum 55 points)	36.5±9.1 (66.3)
General (maximum 80 points)	50.8±11.8 (63.5)
Sum of Q-LES-Q (maximum 465 points)	280.9±59.9 (60.4)

Abbreviation: Q-LES-Q, Quality of Life Satisfaction and Enjoyment Questionnaire.

Table 6 Correlations between quality of life and demographic or clinical variables

Domains	objCGI	subjCGI	Number of hospitalizations
Physical health	−0.45^S,***	−0.63^S,***	−0.23^S,*
Feelings	−0.53^S,***	−0.67^S,***	−0.21^S
Work	−0.39^S,***	−0.44^S,***	−0.26^S,*
Household	−0.37^S,***	−0.50^S,***	−0.09^S
School/study	−0.11^S	−0.11^S	−0.15^S
Leisure time	−0.36^S,**	−0.42^S,***	−0.26^S,*
Social activities	−0.31^S,**	−0.38^S,***	−0.23^S,*
General	−0.44^S,***	−0.61^S,***	−0.28^S,***
Sum of Q-LES-Q	−0.53^S,***	−0.66^S,***	−0.27^S,*

Notes: Superscript letter S represent Spearman’s r.

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01, and

*** p<0.001. Statistically significant data shown in bold.

Abbreviations: objCGI, (Clinical Global Impression) – objective; subjCGI, (Clinical Global Impression) – subjective; Q-LES-Q, Quality of Life Satisfaction and Enjoyment Questionnaire.

Table 7 Correlations between quality of life and positive coping strategies

Positive strategy	Total Q-LES-Q	Physical health	Feelings	Work	Household	School	Leisure	Social activities	General
Underestimation	0.33^P,**	0.34^P,**	0.33^P,**	0.10^S	0.30^S,**	−0.003^S	0.43^P,***	0.26^P,*	0.36^P,**
Guilt denial	0.31^P,**	0.25^P,*	0.28^P,*	0.20^S	0.40^S,***	−0.02^S	0.24^P,*	0.19^P	0.28^P,*
Diversion	0.26^P,*	0.28^P,*	0.29^P,**	0.06^S	0.25^S,*	−0.07^S	0.21^P	0.10^P	0.28^P,*
Compensatory satisfaction	0.19^P	0.21^P	0.14^P	0.02^S	0.21^S	0.02^S	0.28^P,*	0.15^P	0.23^P,*
Situation control	0.41^P,***	0.33^P,**	0.34^P,**	0.36^S,**	0.27^S,*	0.08^S	0.33^P,**	0.28^P,*	0.32^P,**
Reaction control	0.39^P,***	0.35^P,**	0.36^P,**	0.25^S,*	0.38^S,***	−0.12^S	0.27^P,*	0.20^P	0.37^P,***
Positive self-instruction	0.44^P,***	0.38^P,***	0.44^P,***	0.24^S,*	0.29^S,**	0.13^S	0.35^P,**	0.34^P,**	0.45^P,***
Need for social support	0.08^P	0.11^P	0.01^P	−0.08^S	0.15^S	0.03^S	0.12^P	0.17^P	0.07^P
Positive coping	0.45^P,***	0.40^P,***	0.41^P,***	0.25^S,*	0.42^S,***	0.08^S	0.46^P,***	0.28^P,*	0.43^P,***

Notes: Superscript letters P and S represent Pearson’s r and Spearman’s r, respectively.

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01, and

*** p<0.001. Statistically significant data shown in bold.

Abbreviation: Q-LES-Q, Quality of Life Satisfaction and Enjoyment Questionnaire.

Table 8 Correlations between quality of life and negative coping strategies

Negative strategy	Total Q-LES-Q	Physical health	Feelings	Work	Household	School	Leisure	Social activities	General
Active avoidance	0.13^P	0.06^P	0.11^P	0.10^S	0.13^S	−0.10^S	0.16^P	0.10^P	0.11^P
Escape tendency	−0.30^P,**	−0.26^P,*	−0.30^P,**	−0.34^S,**	−0.09^S	−0.04^S	−0.16P	−0.10P	−0.32^P,**
Perseveration	−0.24^P,*	−0.22P	−0.34^P,**	−0.01^S	−0.21^S	0.04^S	−0.30^P,**	−0.23^P,*	−0.33^P,**
Resignation	−0.43^P,***	−0.37^P,***	−0.44^P,***	−0.33^S,**	−0.16^S	−0.09^S	−0.26^P,*	−0.23^P,*	−0.43^P,***
Self−accusation	−0.26^P,*	−0.18P	−0.31^P,**	−0.19^S	−0.16^S	0.03^S	−0.21P	−0.21P	−0.30^P,**
Negative coping	−0.40^P,***	−0.34^P,**	−0.55^P,***	−0.27^S,*	−0.21^S	0.01^S	−0.30^P,**	−0.26^P,*	−0.45^P,***

Notes: Superscript letters P and S represent Pearson’s r and Spearman’s r, respectively.

* p<0.05,

** p<0.01, and

*** p<0.001. Statistically significant data shown in bold.

Abbreviation: Q-LES-Q, Quality of Life Satisfaction and Enjoyment Questionnaire.

Table 9 Multiple regression analysis with the sum of Q-LES-Q as a dependent variable

Model	Regressors	B	SE	β	t	Significance
7	subjCGI	−28.390	4.596	−0.521	−6.177	0.001
	Employment	−31.142	9.928	−0.257	−3.137	0.003
	Positive coping subscale	5.937	1.548	0.317	3.836	0.001
	ANOVA: F=31.255; df=66; p<0.001; adjusted r-squared = 0.579

Abbreviations: Q-LES-Q, Quality of Life Satisfaction and Enjoyment Questionnaire; SE, standard error; subjCGI, (Clinical Global Impression) – subjective; ANOVA, analysis of variance.