Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Our key objective is to identify the core domains of health-related quality of life (QoL). Health-related QoL utility scales are commonly used in economic evaluations to assess the effectiveness of health-care interventions. However, health-care interventions are likely to affect QoL in a broader sense than is quantifiable with traditional scales. Therefore, measures need to go beyond these scales. Unfortunately, there is no consensus in the scientific literature on the essential domains of QoL.
We conducted a three-stage online Delphi consensus procedure to identify the key domains of health-related QoL. Five stakeholder groups (i.e., patients, family of patients, clinicians, scientists and general public) were asked, on three consecutive occasions, what they perceive as the most important domains of health-related QoL. An analysis of existing (health-related) QoL and well-being measurements formed the basis of the Delphi-procedure.
In total, 42 domains of QoL were judged, covering physical, mental and social aspects. All participants rated ‘self-acceptance’, ‘self-esteem’ and ‘good social contacts’ as essential. Strikingly, mental and social domains are perceived as more essential than physical domains across stakeholders groups.
In traditionally used health-related QoL utility measures, physical domains like ‘mobility’ are prominently present. The Delphi-procedure shows that health-related QoL (utility) scales need to put sufficient emphasis on mental and social domains to capture aspects of QoL that are essential to people.
Drummond, M. F., O’Brien, B., Stoddert, G. L., & Torrance, G. W. (1997). Methods for economic evaluation of health care programs. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gold, M. R., Siegel, J. E., Russell, L. B., & Weinstein, M. C. (1996). Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press.
Räsänen, P., Roine, E., Sintonen, H., Semberg-Konttinen, V., Ryynänen, O. P., & Roine, R. (2006). Use of quality-adjusted life years for the estimation of effectiveness of health care: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care,22, 235–241. PubMedCrossRef
Dolan, P. (2009). How does NICE value health? British Medical Journal,339, b2577. CrossRef
Hunt, S. M. (1997). The problem of quality of life. Quality of Life Research,6, 205–212. PubMed
Willemstein, M., Van den Berg, B., Vos, R., De Vet, H., & Ostelo, R. (2009). Rapportage onderzoeksproject “Verkenning effectmaat voor de care sector”. [Research project rapport “Exploration of effect measures for the care sector”]. College van Zorgverzekeringen. www.emgo.nl/files/60. Accessed April 14, 2012.
Gasper, D. (2010). Understanding the diversity of conceptions of well-being and quality of life. Journal of Socio-Economics,39, 351–360. CrossRef
De Meyrick, J. (2003). The Delphi method and health research. Health Education,103, 7–16. CrossRef
Okoli, C., & Pawlowski, S. D. (2004). The Delphi method as a research tool: An example, design considerations and applications. Information & Management,42, 15–29. CrossRef
Linstone, H. A., & Turoff, M. (1975). The Delphi method: Techniques and applications. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
Hsu, C. C., & Sandford, B. A. (2007). The Delphi technique: Making sense of consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 12. Available online: http://pareonline.net/pdf/v12n10.pdf.
Kingston, A. H., Morgan, A. J., Jorm, A. F., Hall, K., Hart, L. M., Kelly, C. M., et al. (2011). Helping someone with problem drug use: A Delphi consensus study of consumers, carers, and clinicians. BioMed central psychiatry,11, 1–7. CrossRef
Custer, R. L., Scarcella, J. A., & Stewart, B. R. (1999). The modified Delphi technique: A rotational modification. Journal of Vocational and Technical Education,15, 1–10.
World Health Organization. (1948). Constitution of the World Health Organization. Geneva: WHO Basic Documents.
Pietersma, S., Van den Akker-van Marle, M. E., & De Vries, M. (2013). Generic quality of life measures in health-care research: Conceptual issues highlighted for the most commonly used utility measures. International Journal of Wellbeing,3, 173–181.
Pill, J. (1971). The Delphi method: Substance, context, a critique and an annotated bibliography. Socio-Economic Planning Science,5, 57–71. CrossRef
Rowe, G., Wright, G., & Bolger, F. (1991). Delphi: A reevaluation of research and theory. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,39, 325–351. CrossRef
Bowling, A. (2005). Measuring health: A review of quality of life measurement scales. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Fryback, D. G., Palta, M., Cherepanov, D., Bolt, D., & Kim, J. S. (2010). Comparison of 5 health-related quality-of-life indexes using item-response theory analysis. Medical Decision Making,30, 1–15. CrossRef
Online Archive of the Australian Centre on Quality of Life [database on the Internet]. Interdisciplinary Centre within Deakin University (Australia): Quality of Life scales. 1930—[cited 2012 March 19]. Available from: www.deakin.edu.au/research/acqol.
Wilson, I. B., & Cleary, P. D. (1995). Linking clinical variables with health-related quality of life. A conceptual model of patient outcomes. The Journal of the American Medical Association,273, 59–65. CrossRef
Sen, A. K. (1985). Commodities and capabilities. Oxford: Elsevier Science Publishers.
Smith, R., Lorgelly, P., Al-Janabi, H., Venkatapuram, S., & Coast, J. (2012). The capability approach: An alternative evaluation paradigm for health economics? In A. M. Jones (Ed.), The elgar companion to health economics (pp. 415–424). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
- Domains of quality of life: results of a three-stage Delphi consensus procedure among patients, family of patients, clinicians, scientists and the general public
Marieke de Vries
M. Elske van den Akker-van Marle
- Springer International Publishing