Cargando…

Systematic review of 29 self-report instruments for assessing quality of life in older adults receiving aged care services

BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) outcomes are used to monitor quality of care for older adults accessing aged care services, yet it remains unclear which QoL instruments best meet older adults’, providers’ and policymakers’ needs. This review aimed to (1) identify QoL instruments used in aged care...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Siette, Joyce, Knaggs, Gilbert Thomas, Zurynski, Yvonne, Ratcliffe, Julie, Dodds, Laura, Westbrook, Johanna
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8603300/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34794991
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050892
_version_ 1784601742474739712
author Siette, Joyce
Knaggs, Gilbert Thomas
Zurynski, Yvonne
Ratcliffe, Julie
Dodds, Laura
Westbrook, Johanna
author_facet Siette, Joyce
Knaggs, Gilbert Thomas
Zurynski, Yvonne
Ratcliffe, Julie
Dodds, Laura
Westbrook, Johanna
author_sort Siette, Joyce
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) outcomes are used to monitor quality of care for older adults accessing aged care services, yet it remains unclear which QoL instruments best meet older adults’, providers’ and policymakers’ needs. This review aimed to (1) identify QoL instruments used in aged care and describe them in terms of QoL domains measured and logistical details; (2) summarise in which aged care settings the instruments have been used and (3) discuss factors to consider in deciding on the suitability of QoL instruments for use in aged care services. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from inception to 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Instruments were included if they were designed for adults (>18 years), available in English, been applied in a peer-reviewed research study examining QoL outcomes in adults >65 years accessing aged care (including home/social care, residential/long-term care) and had reported psychometrics. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two researchers independently reviewed the measures and extracted the data. Data synthesis was performed via narrative review of eligible instruments. RESULTS: 292 articles reporting on 29 QoL instruments were included. Eight domains of QoL were addressed: physical health, mental health, emotional state, social connection, environment, autonomy and overall QoL. The period between 1990 and 2000 produced the greatest number of newly developed instruments. The EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) and Short Form-series were used across multiple aged care contexts including home and residential care. More recent instruments (eg, ICEpop CAPability measure for Older people (ICECAP-O) and Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT)) tend to capture emotional sentiment towards personal circumstances and higher order care needs, in comparison with more established instruments (eg, EQ-5D) which are largely focused on health status. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive list of QoL instruments and their characteristics is provided to inform instrument choice for use in research or for care quality assurance in aged care settings, depending on needs and interests of users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8603300
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86033002021-12-03 Systematic review of 29 self-report instruments for assessing quality of life in older adults receiving aged care services Siette, Joyce Knaggs, Gilbert Thomas Zurynski, Yvonne Ratcliffe, Julie Dodds, Laura Westbrook, Johanna BMJ Open Geriatric Medicine BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) outcomes are used to monitor quality of care for older adults accessing aged care services, yet it remains unclear which QoL instruments best meet older adults’, providers’ and policymakers’ needs. This review aimed to (1) identify QoL instruments used in aged care and describe them in terms of QoL domains measured and logistical details; (2) summarise in which aged care settings the instruments have been used and (3) discuss factors to consider in deciding on the suitability of QoL instruments for use in aged care services. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and CINAHL from inception to 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Instruments were included if they were designed for adults (>18 years), available in English, been applied in a peer-reviewed research study examining QoL outcomes in adults >65 years accessing aged care (including home/social care, residential/long-term care) and had reported psychometrics. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two researchers independently reviewed the measures and extracted the data. Data synthesis was performed via narrative review of eligible instruments. RESULTS: 292 articles reporting on 29 QoL instruments were included. Eight domains of QoL were addressed: physical health, mental health, emotional state, social connection, environment, autonomy and overall QoL. The period between 1990 and 2000 produced the greatest number of newly developed instruments. The EuroQoL-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) and Short Form-series were used across multiple aged care contexts including home and residential care. More recent instruments (eg, ICEpop CAPability measure for Older people (ICECAP-O) and Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT)) tend to capture emotional sentiment towards personal circumstances and higher order care needs, in comparison with more established instruments (eg, EQ-5D) which are largely focused on health status. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive list of QoL instruments and their characteristics is provided to inform instrument choice for use in research or for care quality assurance in aged care settings, depending on needs and interests of users. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-11-16 /pmc/articles/PMC8603300/ /pubmed/34794991 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050892 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Geriatric Medicine
Siette, Joyce
Knaggs, Gilbert Thomas
Zurynski, Yvonne
Ratcliffe, Julie
Dodds, Laura
Westbrook, Johanna
Systematic review of 29 self-report instruments for assessing quality of life in older adults receiving aged care services
title Systematic review of 29 self-report instruments for assessing quality of life in older adults receiving aged care services
title_full Systematic review of 29 self-report instruments for assessing quality of life in older adults receiving aged care services
title_fullStr Systematic review of 29 self-report instruments for assessing quality of life in older adults receiving aged care services
title_full_unstemmed Systematic review of 29 self-report instruments for assessing quality of life in older adults receiving aged care services
title_short Systematic review of 29 self-report instruments for assessing quality of life in older adults receiving aged care services
title_sort systematic review of 29 self-report instruments for assessing quality of life in older adults receiving aged care services
topic Geriatric Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8603300/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34794991
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-050892
work_keys_str_mv AT siettejoyce systematicreviewof29selfreportinstrumentsforassessingqualityoflifeinolderadultsreceivingagedcareservices
AT knaggsgilbertthomas systematicreviewof29selfreportinstrumentsforassessingqualityoflifeinolderadultsreceivingagedcareservices
AT zurynskiyvonne systematicreviewof29selfreportinstrumentsforassessingqualityoflifeinolderadultsreceivingagedcareservices
AT ratcliffejulie systematicreviewof29selfreportinstrumentsforassessingqualityoflifeinolderadultsreceivingagedcareservices
AT doddslaura systematicreviewof29selfreportinstrumentsforassessingqualityoflifeinolderadultsreceivingagedcareservices
AT westbrookjohanna systematicreviewof29selfreportinstrumentsforassessingqualityoflifeinolderadultsreceivingagedcareservices