Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-05-2009

Continence specialists use of quality of life information in routine practice: a national survey of practitioners

Auteurs: Kirstie L. Haywood, Andrew M. Garratt, Sandra Carrivick, Joanne Mangnall, Suzanne M. Skevington

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 4/2009

Abstract

Objectives

To survey continence specialists (CSs) about their assessment practice including their use of quality of life (QoL) information, perceived barriers, benefits and training needs.

Methods

Cross-sectional national postal survey of 624 practicing CSs in the UK. The questionnaire included open and closed questions relating to assessment practice.

Results

Completed questionnaires were returned by 299 (49%) CSs. Although 80% routinely assessed QoL, fewer than 54% demonstrated awareness of published questionnaires. The majority used structured questions (41%) many of which were non-standardised single items (26%) or locally developed questionnaires (19%). Only 22% used standardised patient-completed questionnaires such as the King’s Health Questionnaire and the Incontinence Quality of Life questionnaire. Perceived assessment barriers included the availability of appropriate questionnaires, patient disability, limited guidance, resources and time. Of those routinely assessing QoL, 77% wanted more support; the most useful media cited being the internet, followed by professional guidance and training courses.

Conclusion

Although QoL measurement is highly valued, there was wide variation in assessment practice with few adopting standardised approaches. Most CSs require greater guidance and support that takes account of their diverse needs. Familiar assessment barriers exist which the use of web-based information, in association with professional guidance might help overcome. Clear mechanisms are required to direct standardised and appropriate assessment practice.

vorige artikel Association of insomnia with quality of life, work productivity, and activity impairment

volgende artikel Quality of life of patients with irritable bowel syndrome in Korea

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Norton, N. J. (2004). The perspective of the patient. Gastroenterology, 126, S175–S179. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2003.10.081.PubMedCrossRef

Miner, P. B., Jr. (2004). Economic and personal impact of fecal and urinary incontinence. Gastroenterology, 126, S8–S13. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2003.10.056.PubMedCrossRef

Department-of-Health. (2000). Good practice in continence services. UK Department of Health. http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_4005851. Accessed 2 Mar 2009.

Scottish-Intercollegiate-Guidelines-Network SIGN 79. (2004). Management of urinary incontinence in primary care. A national clinical guideline. Edinburgh: Scottish-Intercollegiate-Guidelines-Network.

Winder, A. (1996). Assessment and investigation of urinary incontinence. In C. Norton (Ed.), Nursing for continence (2nd ed., pp. 33–75). Beaconsfield: Beaconsfield Publishers Ltd.

Getliffe, K., & Dolman, M. (1997). Normal and abnormal bladder function. In K. Getliffe & M. Dolman (Eds.), Promoting continence: A clinical and research resource (pp. 22–67). London: Bailliere Tindall.

Skevington, S. M., Day, R., Chisholm, A., & Trueman, P. (2005). How much do doctors use quality of life information in primary care? Testing the trans-theoretical model of behaviour change. Quality of Life Research, 14, 911–922. doi:10.1007/s11136-004-3710-6.PubMedCrossRef

Bezjak, A., Ng, P., Skeel, R., Depetrillo, A. D., Comis, R., & Taylor, K. M. (2001). Oncologists’ use of quality of life information: Results of a survey of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Physicians. Quality of Life Research, 10, 1–13. doi:10.1023/A:1016692804023.PubMedCrossRef

Morris, J., Perez, D., & McNoe, B. (1998). The use of quality of life data in clinical practice. Quality of Life Research, 7, 85–91. doi:10.1023/A:1008893007068.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Bellamy, N., Kaloni, S., Pope, J., Coulter, K., & Campbell, J. (1998). Quantitative rheumatology: A survey of outcome measurement procedures in routine rheumatology outpatient practice in Canada. The Journal of Rheumatology, 25, 852–858.PubMed

11.

Burke, L., Stifano, T., Dawisha, S. (2006). Guidance for industry—patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labelling claims. Rockville, MD: U.S Department of Health and Human Sciences, Food and Drug Administration.

12.

Garratt, A., Schmidt, L., Mackintosh, A., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2002). Quality of life measurement: Bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. British Medical Journal (Clinical Research Ed.), 324, 1417–1421. doi:10.1136/bmj.324.7351.1417.CrossRef

13.

McDowell, I. (2006). Measuring health: A guide to rating scales and questionnaires (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

14.

Bowling, A. (1995). Measuring disease: A review of disease-specific quality of life measurement scales. Buckingham: Open University Press.

15.

Ganz, P. A. (2002). What outcomes matter to patients: A physician-researcher point of view. Medical Care, 40, III11–III19. doi:10.1097/00005650-200206001-00003.

16.

Greenhalgh, J., Long, A. F., & Flynn, R. (2005). The use of patient reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice: Lack of impact or lack of theory? Social Science and Medicine, 60, 833–843. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.06.022.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Haywood, K., Marshall, S., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2006). Patient participation in the consultation process: A structured review of intervention strategies. Patient Education and Counseling, 63(1–2), 12–23. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2005.10.005.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Naughton, M. J., Donovan, J., Badia, X., Corcos, J., Gotoh, M., et al. (2004). Symptom severity and QoL scales for urinary incontinence. Gastroenterology, 126, S114–S123. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2003.10.059.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Symonds, T. (2003). A review of condition-specific instruments to assess the impact of urinary incontinence on health-related quality of life. European Urology, 43, 219–225. doi:10.1016/S0302-2838(03)00045-9.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Fitzpatrick, R., Davey, C., Buxton, M. J., Jones, D. R. (1998). Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment 2, I–Iv, 1–74.

21.

Marshall, S., Haywood, K., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2006). Impact of patient-reported outcome measures on routine practice: A structured review. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 12(5), 559–568. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2753.2006.00650.x.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Gough, I. R., & Dalgleish, L. I. (1991). What value is given to quality of life assessment by health professionals considering response to palliative chemotherapy for advanced cancer? Cancer, 68, 220–225. doi:10.1002/1097-0142(19910701)68:1<220::AID-CNCR2820680140>3.0.CO;2-H. PubMedCrossRef

23.

Meadows, K. A., Rogers, D., & Greene, T. (1998). Attitudes to the use of health outcome questionnaires in the routine care of patients with diabetes: A survey of general practitioners and practice nurses. The British Journal of General Practice, 48, 1555–1559.PubMed

24.

Funk, S. G., Champagne, M. T., Wiese, R. A., & Tornquist, E. M. (1991). Barriers to using research findings in practice: The clinician’s perspective. Applied Nursing Research, 4(2), 90–95.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Estabrooks, C. A. (1999). Mapping the research utilization field in nursing. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 30(4), 273–294.PubMed

26.

Gosling, S. A., Westabrook, J. I., & Spencer, R. (2004). Nurses’ use of online clinical evidence. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 47(2), 201–211. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03079.x.PubMedCrossRef

27.

National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE). (2006). Guideline. Urinary incontinence: The management of urinary incontinence in women. Draft for consultation. http://guidance.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?o=311453. Accessed 2 Mar 2009.

28.

Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and internet surveys. The tailored design method (2nd ed.). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons Inc.

29.

McColl, E., Jacoby, A., Thomas, L., et al. (2001). Design and use of questionnaires: A review of best practice applicable to surveys of health service staff and patients. Health Technology Assessment, 5(31).

30.

Ritchie, J., & Spencer, L. (1994). Chapter 9. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In A. Bryman & R. G. Burgess (Eds.), Analyzing qualitative data. London: Routledge.

31.

Kelleher, C., Cardozo, L. D., Khullar, C., & Salvatore, S. (1997). A new questionnaire to assess the quality of life of urinary incontinence women. BJOG, 104, 1374–1379. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11006.x.CrossRef

32.

Patrick, D. L., Martin, M. L., Bushnell, D. M., Yalcin, I., Wagner, T. H., & Buesching, D. P. (1999). Quality of life of women with urinary incontinence: Further development of the incontinence quality of life instrument (I-QoL). Urology, 53, 71–76. doi:10.1016/S0090-4295(98)00454-3.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Bayliss, V., & Slater, L. (2004). Pathways for evidence-based continence care. Nursing Standard, 19(9), 45–51.PubMed

34.

The WHOQol Group. (1994). The development of the World Health Organisation Quality of Life Assessment Instrument (The WHOQoL). In J. Orley & W. Kuyken (Eds.), Quality of life assessment: International perspectives (pp. 41–47). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

35.

Ware, J. E. (1997). SF-36 Health Survey Manual and Interpretation Guide. The medical outcomes trust. Boston, USA: Nimrod Press.

36.

The EuroQol-Group. (1990). EuroQol—A new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy (Amsterdam), 16, 199–208. doi:10.1016/0168-8510(90)90421-9.

37.

Donovan, J. L., Kay, H. E., Peters, T. J., et al. (1997). Using ICSQoL to measure the impact of lower urinary tract symptoms on quality of life: Evidence from the ICS-“BHP” study. International Continence Society—Benign Prostate Hyperplasia. British Journal of Urology, 80, 712–721.PubMed

38.

Jackson, S., Donovan, J., Eckford, B. S., Swithenbank, L., & Abrams, P. (1996). The Bristol Female Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms Questionnaire: Development and psychometric testing. British Journal of Urology, 77, 805–812.PubMed

39.

Shumaker, S. A., Wyman, J. F., Uebersax, J. S., McClish, D., & Fantl, J. A. (1994). Health-related quality of life measures for women with urinary incontinence: The incontinence impact questionnaire and the urogenital distress inventory. Quality of Life Research, 3, 291–306. doi:10.1007/BF00451721.PubMedCrossRef

40.

Taylor, K. M., Macdonald, K. G., Bezjak, A., Ng, P., De Petrillo, A. D. (1996). Physician’s perspective on quality of life: An exploratory study of oncologists. Quality of Life Research, 5, 5–14. doi:10.1007/BF00435963.

41.

Streiner, D., & Norman, G. (2003). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications.

42.

Hibbard, J. H. (2003). Engaging healthcare consumers to improve the quality of care. Medical Care, 41, I-61–I-70. doi:10.1097/00005650-200301001-00007.

43.

Velikova, G., Booth, L., Smith, A. B., Brown, P. M., Lynch, P., Brown, J. M., et al. (2004). Measuring quality of life in routine oncology practice improves communication and patient well-being: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 22, 714–724. doi:10.1200/JCO.2004.06.078.PubMedCrossRef

44.

Haywood, K. L. (2006). Patient-reported outcome I: Measuring what matters in musculoskeletal care. Musculoskeletal Care, 4(4), 187–203. doi:10.1002/msc.94.PubMedCrossRef

45.

Jacobsen, P. B., Davis, K., Cella, D. (2002). Assessing quality of life in research and clinical practice. Oncology (Williston Park), 16(9, Suppl 10), 133–139.

46.

Varni, J. W., Burwinkle, T. M., & Lane, M. M. (2005). Health-related quality of life measurement in pediatric clinical practice: An appraisal and precept for future research and application. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 16(3), 34. doi:10.1186/1477-7525-3-34.CrossRef

47.

Bellamy, N. (2005). Science of assessment. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 64(Suppl 2), ii42–ii45. doi:10.1136/ard.2004.031567.

Titel: Continence specialists use of quality of life information in routine practice: a national survey of practitioners
Auteurs: Kirstie L. Haywood
Andrew M. Garratt
Sandra Carrivick
Joanne Mangnall
Suzanne M. Skevington
Publicatiedatum: 01-05-2009
Uitgeverij: Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 4/2009
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-009-9459-1

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2009

The precision of health state valuation by members of the general public using the standard gamble

Association of insomnia with quality of life, work productivity, and activity impairment

In reply to Berger “don’t test for baseline imbalances unless they are known to be present?”

Do not test for baseline imbalances unless they are known to be present?

Normative data of the SF-12 health survey with validation using postmyocardial infarction patients in the Dutch population

Establishing construct validity for the thyroid-specific patient reported outcome measure (ThyPRO): an initial examination