Evidence of disagreement between patient-perceived change and conventional longitudinal evaluation of change in health-related quality of life among older adults

Abstract

Objective: To identify agreement levels between conventional longitudinal evaluation of change (post—pre) and patient-perceived change (post—then test) in health-related quality of life.

Design: A prospective cohort investigation with two assessment points (baseline and six-month follow-up) was implemented.

Setting: Community rehabilitation setting.

Subjects: Frail older adults accessing community-based rehabilitation services.

Intervention: Nil as part of this investigation.

Main measures: Conventional longitudinal change in health-related quality of life was considered the difference between standard EQ-5D assessments completed at baseline and follow-up. To evaluate patient-perceived change a ‘then test’ was also completed at the follow-up assessment. This required participants to report (from their current perspective) how they believe their health-related quality of life was at baseline (using the EQ-5D). Patient-perceived change was considered the difference between ‘then test’ and standard follow-up EQ-5D assessments.

Results: The mean (SD) age of participants was 78.8 (7.3). Of the 70 participants 62 (89%) of data sets were complete and included in analysis. Agreement between conventional (post—pre) and patient-perceived (post—then test) change was low to moderate (EQ-5D utility intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.41, EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS) ICC = 0.21). Neither approach inferred greater change than the other (utility P =0.925, VAS P =0.506). Mean (95% confidence interval (CI)) conventional change in EQ-5D utility and VAS were 0.140 (0.045,0.236) and 8.8 (3.3,14.3) respectively, while patient-perceived change was 0.147 (0.055,0.238) and 6.4 (1.7,11.1) respectively.

Conclusions: Substantial disagreement exists between conventional longitudinal evaluation of change in health-related quality of life and patient-perceived change in health-related quality of life (as measured using a then test) within individuals.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Wade D.

Community rehabilitation or rehabilitation in the community?

Disabil Rehabil 2003; 25: 875-81.

Comans T. , Brauer S. , Haines T. Domiciliary vs centre-based rehabilitation of older community dwellers: randomised trial with economic evaluation. Open Geriatr Med J 2008; 1: 62-7.

Bourdeau I. , Desrosiers J. , Gosselin S. Predictors of reintegration to normal living in older adults discharged from an intensive rehabilitation program. Int J Rehabil Res 2008; 31: 267-74.

Mishoe SC , Maclean JR Assessment of health-related quality of life. Respir Care 2001; 46: 1236-57.

Kind P. Measuring quality of life in evaluating clinical interventions: an overview . Ann Med 2001; 33: 323-7.

Irvine EJ Measuring quality of life: a review. Scand J Gastroenterol Suppl 1996; 221: 5-7.

Hickey A. , Barker M. , McGee H. , O’Boyle C. Measuring health-related quality of life in older patient populations: a review of current approaches. Pharmacoeconomics 2005 ; 23: 971-93.

McPhail S. , Beller E. , Haines T. Two perspectives of proxy reporting of health-related quality of life using the Euroqol-5D, an investigation of agreement. Med Care 2008; 46: 1140-8.

Coast J. , Peters TJ , Richards SH , Gunnell DJ Use of the EuroQoL among elderly acute care patients. Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 1-10.

10.

Logsdon RG , Gibbons LE , McCurry SM , Teri L. Assessing quality of life in older adults with cognitive impairment. Psychosom Med 2002; 64: 510-19.

11.

Urbach DR Measuring quality of life after surgery. Surg Innov 2005; 12: 161-5.

12.

Guyatt GH , Feeny DH , Patrick DL Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med 1993; 118: 622-9.

13.

McSweeny AJ , Creer TL Health-related quality-of-life assessment in medical care. Dis Mon 1995; 41: 1-71.

14.

Oort FJ , Visser MR , Sprangers MA An application of structural equation modeling to detect response shifts and true change in quality of life data from cancer patients undergoing invasive surgery. Qual Life Res 2005; 14: 599-609.

15.

Visser MR , Oort FJ , Sprangers MA Methods to detect response shift in quality of life data: a convergent validity study. Qual Life Res 2005; 14: 629-39.

16.

Schwartz C. , Sprangers M. Methodological approaches for assessing response shift in longitudinal health-related quality-of-life research. Soc Sci Med 1999; 48: 1531-48.

17.

Schwartz CE , Andresen EM , Nosek MA , Krahn GL Response shift theory: important implications for measuring quality of life in people with disability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007; 88: 529-36.

18.

Schwartz CE , Rapkin BD Reconsidering the psychometrics of quality of life assessment in light of response shift and appraisal. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2004; 2: 16.

19.

McPhail S. , Haines T. The response shift phenomenon in clinical trials. J Clin Res Best Pract 2010; 6(2) (accepted for publication).

20.

Ferreira ML , Herbert RD

What does ‘clinically important’ really mean?

Aust J Physiother 2008; 54: 229-30.

21.

Sprangers M. , Schwartz C. Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: a theoretical model. Soc Sci Med 1999; 48: 1507-15.

22.

Podsiadlo D. , Richardson S. The timed ‘up & go’: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991; 39: 142-8.

23.

Rabin R. , de Charro F. EQ-5D: a measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 2001; 33: 337-43.

24.

Dolan P. , Roberts J. Modelling valuations for Eq-5d health states: an alternative model using differences in valuations. Med Care 2002; 40: 442-6.

25.

Mathias S. , Nayak US , Isaacs B. Balance in elderly patients: the ‘get-up and go’ test. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1986; 67: 387-9.

26.

Kind P. , Dolan P. , Gudex C. , Williams A. Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ 1998; 316: 736-41.

27.

Shrout PE , Fleiss JL Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979; 86: 420-8.

28.

Cicchetti DV , Sparrow SA Developing criteria for establishing interrater reliability of specific items: applications to assessment of adaptive behavior . Am J Ment Defic 1981; 86: 127-37.

29.

Pickard AS , Johnson JA , Feeny DH , Shuaib A. , Carriere KC , Nasser AM Agreement between patient and proxy assessments of health-related quality of life after stroke using the EQ-5D and Health Utilities Index. Stroke 2004; 35: 607-12.

30.

Bland JM , Altman DG Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307-10.

31.

Rapkin BD , Schwartz CE Toward a theoretical model of quality-of-life appraisal: Implications of findings from studies of response shift. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2004; 2: 14.

32.

Collins D. Pretesting survey instruments: an overview of cognitive methods. Qual Life Res 2003; 12: 229-38.

33.

Sprangers MA , Van Dam FS , Broersen J. et al. Revealing response shift in longitudinal research on fatigue - the use of the thentest approach. Acta Oncol 1999; 38: 709-18.

34.

Osborne RH , Hawkins M. , Sprangers MA Change of perspective: a measurable and desired outcome of chronic disease self-management intervention programs that violates the premise of preintervention/postintervention assessment. Arthritis Rheum 2006; 55: 458-65.

35.

Visser MR , Smets EM , Sprangers MA , de Haes HJ How response shift may affect the measurement of change in fatigue. J Pain Symptom Manage 2000; 20: 12-18.