Top

Gepubliceerd in:

01-05-2007 | Original Paper

Twelve years–experience with the Patient Generated Index (PGI) of quality of life: a graded structured review

Auteurs: Faith Martin, Laura Camfield, Karen Rodham, Petra Kliempt, Danny Ruta

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 4/2007

Abstract

The Patient Generated Index (PGI) is an individualised quality of life (QoL) measure that has been in use since 1994. Various adaptations have been made to suit a variety of client groups. The PGI’s psychometric properties have been studied but their review is necessary to inform instrument choice. This article provides a structured review, using grading criteria adapted from those developed to aid outcome measure selection for use with older people. These criteria grade quality of evidence and strength of findings for psychometric validity, providing a useful model for future reviews. All published articles providing data addressing validity, reliability and/or responsiveness were included in the review. Eighteen relevant articles were identified and analysed using the grading criteria. Variable results and quality of investigation were seen. Generally the measure was found to be adequately reliable for group comparisons. The PGI appeared valid but evidence for responsiveness was unclear. Those versions of the measure using fewer points in their Likert scales may have higher reliability. Cognitions involved in QoL judgements remain little understood and investigations of psychometric properties may be enhanced by examination of appraisal processes.

vorige artikel Exploring dimensions of oral health-related quality of life using experts–opinions

volgende artikel Documenting the rationale and psychometric characteristics of patient reported outcomes for labeling and promotional claims: the PRO Evidence Dossier

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Ahmed, S. M., Mayo, N. E., Wood-Dauphinee, S., Hanley, J. A., & Cohen, S. R. (2005). Using the patient generated index to evaluate response shift post-stroke. Quality of Life Research, 14, 2247–257.CrossRefPubMed

Allison, P. J., Locker, D., & Feine, J. S. (1997). Quality of life: A dynamic construct. Social Science and Medicine, 45, 221–30.CrossRefPubMed

Atkins, D., Best, D., Briss, P. A., Eccles, M., Falck-Ytter, Y., Flottorp, S., et al. (2004). Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. British Medical Journal, 328, 1490.CrossRefPubMed

Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. The Lancet, 327, 307–10.CrossRef

Callaghan, B. G., & Condie, M. E. (2003). A post-discharge quality of life outcome measure for lower limb amputees: Test-retest reliability and construct validity. Clinical Rehabilitation, 17, 858–64.CrossRefPubMed

Camilleri-Brennan, J., Ruta, D., & Steele, R. J. C. (2002). Patient generated index: New instrument for measuring quality of life in patients with rectal cancer. World Journal of Surgery, 26, 1354–359.CrossRefPubMed

Cummins, R. (2000). Personal income and subjective well-being: A review. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1, 133–58.CrossRef

Dempster, M., & Donnelly, M. (2000). How well do elderly people compete individualised quality of life measures: An exploratory study. Quality of Life Research, 9, 369–75.CrossRefPubMed

Dempster, M., Donnelly, M., & Fitzsimons, D. (2002). Generic, disease-specific and individualised approaches to measuring health-related quality of life among people with heart disease –a comparative analysis. Psychology and Health, 17, 447–57.CrossRef

10.

Fitzpatrick, R. (1999). Assessment of quality of life as an outcome: Finding measurements that reflect individuals–priorities. Quality in Health Care, 8, 1–.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Griffiths, R., Jayasuriya, R., & Maitland, H. (2000). Development of a client-generated health outcome measure for community nursing. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 24, 529–35.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Guyatt, G., Walter, S., & Norman, G. (1987). Measuring change over time: Assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 40, 171–78.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Haywood, K., Garratt, A. M., Dziedzic, K., & Dawes, P. T. (2003). Patient centered assessment of ankylosing spondylitis-specific health related quality of life: Evaluation of the patient generated index. The Journal of Rheumatology, 30, 764–73.PubMed

14.

Helmstadter, G. C. (1964). Principles of psychological measurement. New York: Appleton-Century Crofts.

15.

Herd, R. M., Tidman, M. J., Ruta, D., & Hunter, J. A. A. (1997). Measurement of quality of life in atopic dermatitis: Correlation and validation of two different methods. British Journal of Dermatology, 136, 502–07.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Jenkinson, C., Stradling, J., & Petersen, S. (1998). How should we evaluate health status? A comparison of three methods in patients presenting with obstructive sleep apnoea. Quality of Life Research, 7, 95–00.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Jobe, J. (2003). Cognitive psychology and self-reports: Models and methods. Quality of Life Research, 12, 219–27.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Jobe, J. B., & Mingay, D. J. (1989). Cognitive research improves questionnaires. AJPH, 79, 1053–055.CrossRef

19.

Jolles, B. M., Buchbinder, R., & Beaton, D. E. (2005). A study compared nine patient-specific indices for musculoskeletal disorders. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 58, 791–01.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Joyce, C., McGee, H., & O’Boyle, C. (1999). Individual quality of life: Approaches to conceptualisation and assessment. London: Psychology Press.

21.

Katz, J. N., Larson, M. G., Philips, C. B., Fossel, A. H., & Liang, M. H. (1992). Comparative measurement sensitivity of short and longer health status instruments. Medical Care, 30, 917–25.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Kelly, T. L. (1927). Principles of psychological measurement. Yonkers: World Books.

23.

Kliempt, P. (2001). Developing a methodology for the identification and selection of outcome measures for use in older people living in the community. PhD thesis, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health. Dundee, Scotland: University of Dundee.

24.

Larsen, R. J., & Fredrickson, B. L. (2003). Measurement issues in emotion research. In D. Kahneman, E. Diener, & N. Schwartz (Eds.), Well-being: The foundations of hedonic psychology (pp. 40–0). London: Russell Sage Publications.

25.

Lintern, T. C., Beaumont, G., Kenealy, P. M., & Murrell, R .C. (2001). Quality of life (QoL) in severely disabled multiple sclerosis patients: Comparison of three QoL measures using multidimensional scaling. Quality of Life Research, 10, 371–78.CrossRefPubMed

26.

LLewellyn, C. D., McGurk, M., & Weinman, J. (2006). Head and neck cancer: To what extent can psychological factors explain differences between health-related quality of life and individual quality of life. British Journal of Oral and Mazillofacial Surgery, 44, 351–57.CrossRef

27.

Macduff, C., & Russell, E. (1998). The problem of measuring change in individual health-related quality of life by postal questionnaire: Use of the patient-generated index in a disabled population. Quality of Life Research, 7, 761–19.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

29.

Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, H. I. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

30.

O’Boyle, C., McGee, H., Hickey, A., O’Malley, K., & Joyce, C. R. B. (1992). Individual QOL in patients undergoing hip replacement. Lancet, 339, 1088–091.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Patel, K. K., Veenstra, D. L., & Patrick, D. L. (2003). A review of selected patient-generated outcome measures and their application in clinical trials. Value in Health, 6, 595–03.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Poellmann, W., Busch, C., & Voltz, R. (2005). Lebensqualitat bei Multipler Sklerose: Messinstrumente, Bedeutung, Probleme und Perspektiven [Quality of life in multiple sclerosis: Measures, relevance, problems and perpsectives. Der Nervenarzt, 76, 154–69.CrossRef

33.

Rankin, G., & Stokes, M. (1998). Reliability of assessment tools in rehabilitation: An illustration of appropriate statistical analysis. Clinical Rehabilitation, 12, 187–99.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Rapkin, B. D., & Schwartz, C. E. (2004). Toward a theoretical model of quality of life appraisal: Implications of findings from studies of response shift. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes at http://www.hqlo.com/content/2/1/14 2004; 2.

35.

Robling, M. (2006). Measuring change in patient quality of life over time: An evaluation of scale responsiveness and patient response shift. PhD Thesis, Department of General Practice, Cardiff University.

36.

Ruta, D., Camfield, L., & Donaldson, C. (2006). Sen and the art of quality of life maintenance: Towards a working definition of quality of life. Wellbeing in Developing Countries (WeD) Research Group Working Paper. Available at http://www.bath.ac.uk/econ-dev/wellbeing/research/workingpaperpdf/wed12.pdf

37.

Ruta, D., Garratt, A. M., Leng, M., Russel, I. T., & MacDonald, L. M. (1994). A new approach to the measurement of quality of life: The patient generated index. Medical Care, 32, 1109–126.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Ruta, D., Garratt, A. M., & Russell, I. T. (1999). Patient centred assessment of quality of life for patients with four common conditions. Quality in Health Care, 8, 22–9.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Ruta, D., Martin, F., Devine, J., Bevan, P., & Camfield, L. (2004) Assessing individual quality of life in developing countries: Piloting a global PGI in Ethiopia and Bangladesh. International Society for Quality of Life Research: Harmonizing International Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) Research, Hong Kong

40.

Schwartz, C. E., & Rapkin, B. D. (2004). Reconsidering the psychometrics of quality of life assessment in light of response shift and appraisal. Health and quality of life outcomes at http:/ww.hq10.com/content/2/1/16

41.

Schwartz, C. E., & Sprangers, M. A. G. (1999). Methodological approaches for assessing response shift in longitudinal health-related quality of life research. Social Science and Medicine, 48, 1531–548.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. (1995). Health measurement scales: A Practical guide to their development and use Oxford: Oxford University Press.

43.

Symon, A., MacDonald, A., & Ruta, D. (2002). Postnatal quality of life assessment: Introducing the mother-generated index. Birth, 29, 40–6.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Symon, A., MacKay, A., & Ruta, D. (2003). Postnatal quality of life: A pilot study using the mother-generated index. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 42, 21–9.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Tugwell, P., Bombardier, C., Buchanan, W. W., Goldsmith, C., Grace, E., Benett, K. J., et al. (1990). Methotrexate in rheumatoid-arthritis-impact on quality of life assessed by traditional standard-item and individualized patient preference health-status questionnaires. Archives of Internal Medicine, 150, 59–2.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Tully, M. P., & Cantrill, J. A. (2000). The validity of the modified patient generated index –a quantitative and qualitative approach. Quality of Life Research, 9, 509–20.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Tully, M. P., & Cantrill, J. A. (2002). The test-retest reliability of the modified patient generated index. Journal of Health Service Research Policy, 7, 81–9.CrossRef

Titel: Twelve years–experience with the Patient Generated Index (PGI) of quality of life: a graded structured review
Auteurs: Faith Martin
Laura Camfield
Karen Rodham
Petra Kliempt
Danny Ruta
Publicatiedatum: 01-05-2007
Uitgeverij: Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 4/2007
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-006-9152-6

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2007

What drives older women’s perceptions of health-related quality of life?

Factors associated with health-related quality of life among hemodialysis patients in the DOPPS

Factors affecting health-related quality of life in women with recurrent breast cancer in Korea

Item Response Theory Methods can Improve the Measurement of Physical Function by Combining the Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire and the SF-36 Physical Function Scale

The SF36 Version 2: critical analyses of population weights, scoring algorithms and population norms

The Affectometer 2: a measure of positive mental health in UK populations