Cargando…
Correlates of a Single-Item Quality-of-Life Measure in People Aging with Disabilities
OBJECTIVE: Practical quality-of-life (QOL) screening methods are needed to help focus clinical decision-making on what matters to individuals with disabilities. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of a database from a large study of adults aging with impairments focused on four diagnostic groups: cerebral...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4640050/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25888654 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PHM.0000000000000298 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: Practical quality-of-life (QOL) screening methods are needed to help focus clinical decision-making on what matters to individuals with disabilities. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of a database from a large study of adults aging with impairments focused on four diagnostic groups: cerebral palsy (n = 134), polio (n = 321), rheumatoid arthritis (n = 99), and stroke (n = 82). Approximately 20% of cases were repeated measures of the same individuals 3–5 yrs later. Functional levels, depression, and social interactions were assessed. The single-item, subjective, seven-point Kemp Quality of Life Scale measured QOL. For each diagnostic group, Kemp Quality of Life Scale responses were divided into low, average, and high QOL subgroups. Analysis of variance and Tukey honestly significant difference tests compared clinical characteristics among these subgroups. RESULTS: Duration of disability varied among the four groups. Within each group, QOL subgroups were similar in age, sex, and duration of disability. Low mean QOL was associated with lower functional level, higher depression scores, and lower social interaction (P < 0.001) in all four groups. In contrast, high mean QOL was associated with higher social interaction (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The Kemp Quality of Life Scale relates significantly to clinically relevant variables in adults with impairments. The scale’s utility in direct clinical care merits further examination. |
---|