Health-related quality of life outcomes measures

被引:169
作者
Andresen, EM
Meyers, AR
机构
[1] St Louis Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Community Hlth, St Louis, MO 63108 USA
[2] Boston Univ, Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Serv, Boston, MA USA
来源
ARCHIVES OF PHYSICAL MEDICINE AND REHABILITATION | 2000年 / 81卷 / 12期
关键词
disabled persons; outcome assessment (health care); rehabilitation;
D O I
10.1053/apmr.2000.20621
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
Objective: To review critically the features of measures of generic health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for disability outcomes research. Data Sources: A search of electronic databases, summary reviews, books, and government documents was performed. Comment and experiences from participants of a conference on outcomes research were also incorporated. Study Selection: English language literature from scientists from a broad range of disciplines and research settings, including medicine, nursing, social science, and public health, and health services research and practice. Data Extraction: A critical review of measures that have been or might be used to measure disability outcomes. Data Synthesis: Commonly used generic measures of HRQOL can be applied to disability outcomes research with some caveats. Three common tools are the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), Sickness Impact Profile (SIP), and Quality of Well-Being (QWB) scale. The SF-36 and SIP have been used with some success in research with people with disability. The QWB scale has been used less frequently. Conclusion: Most studies using generic HRQOL tools are of groups with specific impairments rather than heterogeneous groups of people with disability. None of the tools appears to measure HRQOL without some potential biases leg, inappropriate wording) for people with disability, but more specific testing of these problems is needed. Also needed are studies to determine whether these tools can measure meaningful longitudinal changes.
引用
收藏
页码:S30 / S45
页数:16
相关论文
共 264 条
[1]  
Ahlstrom G, 1996, SCAND J REHABIL MED, V28, P147
[2]   The disability paradox: high quality of life against all odds [J].
Albrecht, GL ;
Devlieger, PJ .
SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 1999, 48 (08) :977-988
[3]   Self-efficacy and social support as mediators in the relation between disease severity and quality of life in patients with epilepsy [J].
Amir, M ;
Roziner, I ;
Knoll, A ;
Neufeld, MY .
EPILEPSIA, 1999, 40 (02) :216-224
[4]   COMPARING THE PERFORMANCE OF HEALTH-STATUS MEASURES FOR HEALTHY OLDER ADMITS [J].
ANDERSEN, EM ;
PATRICK, DL ;
CARTER, WB ;
MALMGREN, JA .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 1995, 43 (09) :1030-1034
[5]   Validation of the short form 36 (SF-36) health survey questionnaire among stroke patients [J].
Anderson, C ;
Laubscher, S ;
Burns, R .
STROKE, 1996, 27 (10) :1812-1816
[6]   Comparison of the quality of well-being scale and the SF-36 results among two samples of ill adults: AIDS and other illnesses [J].
Anderson, JP ;
Kaplan, RM ;
Coons, SJ ;
Schneiderman, LJ .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1998, 51 (09) :755-762
[7]   Baseline correlates with quality of life among men and women with medication-controlled hypertension. The trial of nonpharmacologic interventions in the elderly (TONE) [J].
Anderson, RT ;
Hogan, P ;
Appel, L ;
Rosen, R ;
Shumaker, SA .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 1997, 45 (09) :1080-1085
[8]  
ANDREASSEN E M, 1981, Fauna Norvegica Series A, V2, P1
[9]  
Andresen E., 1997, ASSESSING HLTH STATU
[10]   Selecting a generic measure of health-related quality of life for use among older adults - A comparison of candidate instruments [J].
Andresen, EM ;
Rothenberg, BM ;
Panzer, R ;
Katz, P ;
McDermott, MP .
EVALUATION & THE HEALTH PROFESSIONS, 1998, 21 (02) :244-264