PATIENT PREFERENCE FOR HEALTH-STATUS SCREENING INSTRUMENTS

被引：6

作者：

HOLMES, AM ^{[1
]}

PARCHMAN, ML ^{[1
]}

BANG, H ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] LONDON HOSP,DEPT FAMILY MED,INDIANAPOLIS,IN 46202

来源：

FAMILY PRACTICE | 1995年 / 12卷 / 01期

关键词：

D O I：

10.1093/fampra/12.1.88

中图分类号：

R1 [预防医学、卫生学];

学科分类号：

1004 ; 120402 ;

摘要：

The Dartmouth Primary Care Cooperative Information Project (COOP) charts and mini-Duke-UNC Health Profile (DUHP) instruments were developed to screen patients' health status in clinical settings. The purpose of this study is to determine patient preferences for use of these instruments in a family practice setting. A sample of 203 consecutive, consenting patients presenting to a university-based family practice clinic was administered both instruments. Patients then completed a questionnaire which asked which instrument was preferred and why. Overall, neither instrument was significantly preferred by patients. Patient perceived accuracy for the COOP was significantly positively related to age and negatively related to quality of life. Patient ease, rather than perceived accuracy, dominated the preference relationship, yet neither instrument was found to be easier to use by the elderly or those in poorer health. This study reveals that patients prefer instruments which are easier to use, but that neither the COOP nor the mini-DUHP was found to be significantly easier to use by all patients. However, the COOP was perceived to be more accurate for a subset of patients, the elderly with poor quality of life beyond the realm of health.

引用

页码：88 / 92

页数：5

共 22 条

[1]

Nelson E., Landgraf J., Hays R., Wasson J., Kirk J., The functional status of patients. How can it be measured in physicians offices?, Med Care, 28, pp. 1111-1126, (1990)

[2]

Deyo R.A., Carter W.B., Strategies for improving and expanding the application of health status measures in clinical settings, Med Care, 30, pp. 176-186, (1992)

[3]

Rosenberg E.E., Tannenbaum T.N., Measuring health status: An approach for family practice researchers, Fam Med, 23, pp. 52-56, (1991)

[4]

Chen A.L., Broadhead W.E., Doe E.A., Broyles W.K., Patient acceptance of two health status measures: The Medical Outcomes Study Short-form general health survey and the Duke health profile, Fam Med, 25, pp. 536-539, (1993)

[5]

Golden W.E., Health status measurement: Implementation strategies, Med Care, 30, pp. 187-195, (1992)

[6]

Nelson E.C., Berwick D.M., The measurement of health status in clinical practice, Med Care, 27, pp. 77-90, (1989)

[7]

Parkerson G.R., Broadhead W.E., Tse C.J., The Duke Health Profile: A 17-item measure of health and dysfunction, Med Care, 28, pp. 1056-1072, (1990)

[8]

Kaplan R.M., Anderson J.P., Wu A.W., The quality of well-being scale: Applications in AIDS, cystic fibrosis, and arthritis, Med Care, 27, pp. 27-43, (1989)

[9]

Stewart A.L., Hays R.D., Ware J.E., The MOS Short-form general health survey: Reliability and validity in a patient population, Med Care, 26, pp. 724-735, (1988)

[10]

Nelson E., Wasson J., Kirk J., Assessment of function in routine clinical practice: Description of the COOP chart method and preliminary findings, Chron Dis 1987, 40, pp. 55-69

← 1 2 3 →