Análise por grupos focais do instrumento de avaliação de qualidade de vida – WHOQOL/BREF traduzido para a língua brasileira de sinais (WHOQOL/LIBRAS)

• Autor(a) principal: Duarte , Soraya Bianca Reis
• Data de Publicação: 2011
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFG
• Texto Completo: http://repositorio.bc.ufg.br/tede/handle/tede/4522
• topic: Qualidade de vida; Organização mundial de saúde; Surdez; Linguagem de sinais; Barreiras de comunicação; Saúde da pessoa com deficiência ou incapacidade; Defesa das pessoas com deficiência; Quality of life; The world health organization; Deafness; Sign language; Communication barriers; Health of people with disabilities or impairments; Defense of people with disabilities; CIENCIAS DA SAUDE

INTRODUCTION: there are several forms of expression, understanding and interpretation of the concept of disability, as well as a multitude of indicators that interfere significantly to the conceptual composition of the theme. In recent decades, the biological view of disability has been expanded due to the inclusion of socio-anthropological aspects. In the case of the deaf, the need to have their story considered through this approach is relevant to the appropriate care by the Health Professionals. OBJECTIVE: to analyze the Brazilian Sign Language (Libras) version of the WHOQOL-BREF instrument for assessing quality of life in focal groups. METHODS: transversal type descriptive and exploratory qualitative research using the technique of focal groups in three groups distributed as follows: 1) deaf people; 2) deaf people families; and 3) Libras interpreters. Two meetings were held with three focal groups. The first aimed to explain all the details of the research, delivery of a DVD, signing of the Term of Free and Informed Consent and application of a sociodemographic questionnaire. The second aimed to discuss and analyze the Libras version of the WHOQOL-BREF. Data were analyzed based on the technique of analysis of categorial and thematic content proposed by Bardin. RESULTS:100% of the participants of the three Focal Groups (GFs) understood and considered the questions relevant to the QOL of the deaf. In the category of suggestion, GF1 came with 76.94%, GF2 presented 65.39% and GF3 came with 73.08% of the questions that needed changes. CONCLUSIONS: the scarcity of scientific research on the use of focal groups with deaf people was considered a challenging factor. This study showed that the technique of focal groups with deaf people will have better success if it consists of a maximum of six members per group.