Cargando…

Health-related quality of life before and after management in adults referred to otolaryngology: rospective national study

OBJECTIVE: An assessment of the effect of otolaryngological management on the health-related quality of life of patients. DESIGN: Application of the Health Utilities Index mark 3 (HUI-3) before and after treatment; application of the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) after treatment. SETTING: Six otol...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Swan, IRC, Guy, FH, Akeroyd, MA
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3380566/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22212609
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-4486.2011.02433.x
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: An assessment of the effect of otolaryngological management on the health-related quality of life of patients. DESIGN: Application of the Health Utilities Index mark 3 (HUI-3) before and after treatment; application of the Glasgow Benefit Inventory (GBI) after treatment. SETTING: Six otolaryngological departments around Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: A 9005 adult patients referred to outpatient clinics. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Complete HUI-3 data was collected from 4422 patients; complete GBI data from 4235; complete HUI-3 and GBI data from 3884. RESULTS: The overall change in health related quality of life from before to after management was just +0.02. In the majority of subgroups of data (classified by type of management) there was essentially no change in HUI-3 score. The major exceptions were those patients provided with a hearing aid (mean change 0.08) and those whose problem was managed surgically (mean change 0.04). The mean GBI score was 5.3 which is low. Those managed surgically reported a higher GBI score of 13.0. CONCLUSION: We found that patients treated surgically or given a hearing aid reported a significant improvement in their health related quality of life after treatment in otolaryngology departments. In general, patients treated in other ways reported no significant improvement. We argue that future research should look carefully at patient groups where there is unexpectedly little benefit from current treatment methods and consider more effective methods of management.