Cargando…
Comparison of two instruments for measurement of quality of life in clinical practice - a qualitative study
BACKGROUND: The study aimed to investigate the meaning patients assign to two measures of quality of life: the Schedule for Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW) and the SEIQoL-DW Disease Related (DR) version, in a clinical oncology setting. Even though the use of qua...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210549/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25300493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-115 |
_version_ | 1782341395205324800 |
---|---|
author | Wettergren, Lena Hedlund Lindberg, Mathilde Kettis, Åsa Glimelius, Bengt Ring, Lena |
author_facet | Wettergren, Lena Hedlund Lindberg, Mathilde Kettis, Åsa Glimelius, Bengt Ring, Lena |
author_sort | Wettergren, Lena |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The study aimed to investigate the meaning patients assign to two measures of quality of life: the Schedule for Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW) and the SEIQoL-DW Disease Related (DR) version, in a clinical oncology setting. Even though the use of quality of life assessments has increased during the past decades, uncertainty regarding how to choose the most suitable measure remains. SEIQoL-DW versions assesses the individual’s perception of his or her present quality of life by allowing the individual to nominate the domains to be evaluated followed by a weighting procedure resulting in qualitative (domains) as well as quantitative outcomes (index score). METHODS: The study applied a cross-sectional design with a qualitative approach and collected data from a purposeful sample of 40 patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Patients were asked to complete two measures, SEIQoL-DW and the SEIQoL-DR, to assess quality of life. This included nomination of the areas in life considered most important and rating of these areas; after completion patients participated in cognitive interviews around their selections of areas. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim which was followed by analysis using a phenomenographic approach. RESULTS: The analyses of nominated areas of the two measures resulted in 11 domains reflecting what patients perceived had greatest impact on their quality of life. Analysis of the cognitive interviews resulted in 16 thematic categories explaining the nominated domains. How patients reflected around their quality of life appeared to differ by version (DW vs. DR). The DW version more often related to positive aspects in life while the DR version more often related to negative changes in life due to having cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The two SEIQoL versions tap into different concepts; health-related quality of life, addressing losses and problems related to having cancer and, quality of life, more associated with aspects perceived as positive in life. The SEIQoL-DR and the SEIQoL-DW are recommended in clinical practice to take both negative and positive aspects into account and acting on the problems of greatest importance to the patient. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4210549 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42105492014-10-29 Comparison of two instruments for measurement of quality of life in clinical practice - a qualitative study Wettergren, Lena Hedlund Lindberg, Mathilde Kettis, Åsa Glimelius, Bengt Ring, Lena BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: The study aimed to investigate the meaning patients assign to two measures of quality of life: the Schedule for Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW) and the SEIQoL-DW Disease Related (DR) version, in a clinical oncology setting. Even though the use of quality of life assessments has increased during the past decades, uncertainty regarding how to choose the most suitable measure remains. SEIQoL-DW versions assesses the individual’s perception of his or her present quality of life by allowing the individual to nominate the domains to be evaluated followed by a weighting procedure resulting in qualitative (domains) as well as quantitative outcomes (index score). METHODS: The study applied a cross-sectional design with a qualitative approach and collected data from a purposeful sample of 40 patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Patients were asked to complete two measures, SEIQoL-DW and the SEIQoL-DR, to assess quality of life. This included nomination of the areas in life considered most important and rating of these areas; after completion patients participated in cognitive interviews around their selections of areas. Interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim which was followed by analysis using a phenomenographic approach. RESULTS: The analyses of nominated areas of the two measures resulted in 11 domains reflecting what patients perceived had greatest impact on their quality of life. Analysis of the cognitive interviews resulted in 16 thematic categories explaining the nominated domains. How patients reflected around their quality of life appeared to differ by version (DW vs. DR). The DW version more often related to positive aspects in life while the DR version more often related to negative changes in life due to having cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The two SEIQoL versions tap into different concepts; health-related quality of life, addressing losses and problems related to having cancer and, quality of life, more associated with aspects perceived as positive in life. The SEIQoL-DR and the SEIQoL-DW are recommended in clinical practice to take both negative and positive aspects into account and acting on the problems of greatest importance to the patient. BioMed Central 2014-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4210549/ /pubmed/25300493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-115 Text en © Wettergren et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014 This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Wettergren, Lena Hedlund Lindberg, Mathilde Kettis, Åsa Glimelius, Bengt Ring, Lena Comparison of two instruments for measurement of quality of life in clinical practice - a qualitative study |
title | Comparison of two instruments for measurement of quality of life in clinical practice - a qualitative study |
title_full | Comparison of two instruments for measurement of quality of life in clinical practice - a qualitative study |
title_fullStr | Comparison of two instruments for measurement of quality of life in clinical practice - a qualitative study |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of two instruments for measurement of quality of life in clinical practice - a qualitative study |
title_short | Comparison of two instruments for measurement of quality of life in clinical practice - a qualitative study |
title_sort | comparison of two instruments for measurement of quality of life in clinical practice - a qualitative study |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4210549/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25300493 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-14-115 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wettergrenlena comparisonoftwoinstrumentsformeasurementofqualityoflifeinclinicalpracticeaqualitativestudy AT hedlundlindbergmathilde comparisonoftwoinstrumentsformeasurementofqualityoflifeinclinicalpracticeaqualitativestudy AT kettisasa comparisonoftwoinstrumentsformeasurementofqualityoflifeinclinicalpracticeaqualitativestudy AT glimeliusbengt comparisonoftwoinstrumentsformeasurementofqualityoflifeinclinicalpracticeaqualitativestudy AT ringlena comparisonoftwoinstrumentsformeasurementofqualityoflifeinclinicalpracticeaqualitativestudy |