Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 7/2013

01-09-2013

Pitfalls in the interpretation of standardised quality of life instruments for individual patients? A qualitative study in colorectal cancer

Auteurs: Timothy R. Wilson, Yvonne Birks, David J. Alexander

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 7/2013

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Purpose

Despite being readily available and practical to administer, standardised instruments are not widely used in clinical practice. Concerns have been raised about the validity of applying such data to individuals. The aim of this qualitative study was to explore the practical difficulties of interpreting standardised HrQoL data for individual patients.

Methods

A purposive sample of 20 patients with colorectal cancer was chosen from 210 participants in a prospective HrQoL study. In an in-depth interview, individual participants were asked about their experiences and to review the accuracy of their own HrQoL data, collected over preceding months using four different instruments (FACT-C QLQ-C30/CR38 SF12 and EQ-5D). A framework qualitative analysis was used to develop emerging themes.

Results

A number of themes emerged from the analysis to explain why disparity arose between the patients’ experiences and the questionnaire data in certain situations. These included weakly worded items that over emphasised health problems, incongruous items within scales causing unpredictable scores, insufficient levels of response causing insensitivity, and unrecognised reversal of item direction causing contradictory scores. Exogenous factors such as mood and co-morbidities also influenced HrQoL reporting.

Conclusions

Data from standardised instruments can be used to measure the HrQoL of individuals in clinical practice, but the instruments used need careful selection and interpretation. Appropriate guidance linked to the themes of this study is provided.
Literatuur
1.
go back to reference Snyder, C. F., & Aaronson, N. K. (2009). Use of patient reported outcomes in clinical practice. Lancet, 374, 369–370.PubMedCrossRef Snyder, C. F., & Aaronson, N. K. (2009). Use of patient reported outcomes in clinical practice. Lancet, 374, 369–370.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Higginson, I. J., & Carr, A. J. (2001). Measuring quality of life: Using quality of life measures in the clinical setting. British Medical Journal, 322(7297), 1297–1300.PubMedCrossRef Higginson, I. J., & Carr, A. J. (2001). Measuring quality of life: Using quality of life measures in the clinical setting. British Medical Journal, 322(7297), 1297–1300.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Koller, M., & Lorenz, W. (1998). Quality of life research in patients with rectal cancer: Traditional approaches versus a problem-solving oriented perspective. Langenbecks Archives of Surgery, 383(6), 427–436.CrossRef Koller, M., & Lorenz, W. (1998). Quality of life research in patients with rectal cancer: Traditional approaches versus a problem-solving oriented perspective. Langenbecks Archives of Surgery, 383(6), 427–436.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Giesinger, J., Kemmler, G., Meranger, V., Gamper, E., Oberguggenberger, A., Sperner-Unterweger, B., et al. (2009). Towards the implementation of quality of life monitoring in daily clinical routine: Methodological issues and clinical implication. Breast Care, 4, 148–154.PubMedCrossRef Giesinger, J., Kemmler, G., Meranger, V., Gamper, E., Oberguggenberger, A., Sperner-Unterweger, B., et al. (2009). Towards the implementation of quality of life monitoring in daily clinical routine: Methodological issues and clinical implication. Breast Care, 4, 148–154.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Carr, A. J., & Higginson, I. J. (2001). Are quality of life measures patient centred? British Medical Journal, 322(7298), 1357–1360.PubMedCrossRef Carr, A. J., & Higginson, I. J. (2001). Are quality of life measures patient centred? British Medical Journal, 322(7298), 1357–1360.PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference O’Boyle, C. A. (1994). The schedule for the evaluation of individual quality of life (SEIQoL). International Journal of Mental Health, 23, 3–23. O’Boyle, C. A. (1994). The schedule for the evaluation of individual quality of life (SEIQoL). International Journal of Mental Health, 23, 3–23.
7.
go back to reference Martin, F., Camfield, L., Rodham, K., Kliempt, P., & Ruta, D. (2007). Twelve years experience with the patient generated index (PGI) of quality of life: A graded structured review. Quality of Life Research, 16, 705–715.PubMedCrossRef Martin, F., Camfield, L., Rodham, K., Kliempt, P., & Ruta, D. (2007). Twelve years experience with the patient generated index (PGI) of quality of life: A graded structured review. Quality of Life Research, 16, 705–715.PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Velikova, G., Wright, P., Smith, A. B., Stark, D., Perren, T., Brown, J., et al. (2001). Self-reported quality of life of individual cancer patients: Concordance of results with disease course and medical records. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 19, 2064–2073.PubMed Velikova, G., Wright, P., Smith, A. B., Stark, D., Perren, T., Brown, J., et al. (2001). Self-reported quality of life of individual cancer patients: Concordance of results with disease course and medical records. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 19, 2064–2073.PubMed
9.
go back to reference Wilson, T. R., Alexander, D. J., & Kind, P. (2006). Measuring health related quality of life in the early follow-up of colorectal cancer. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 49, 1692–1702.PubMedCrossRef Wilson, T. R., Alexander, D. J., & Kind, P. (2006). Measuring health related quality of life in the early follow-up of colorectal cancer. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 49, 1692–1702.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Ware, J. E., Jr, Kosinski, M., Turner-Bowker, D. M., & Gandek, B. (2002). How to score version 2 of the SF-12 health survey. Lincoln, Rhode Island: QualyMetric. Ware, J. E., Jr, Kosinski, M., Turner-Bowker, D. M., & Gandek, B. (2002). How to score version 2 of the SF-12 health survey. Lincoln, Rhode Island: QualyMetric.
11.
go back to reference Kind, P., Dolan, P., Gudex, C., & Williams, A. (1998). Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey[see comment]. BMJ, 316, 736–741.PubMedCrossRef Kind, P., Dolan, P., Gudex, C., & Williams, A. (1998). Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey[see comment]. BMJ, 316, 736–741.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Brazier, J., Jones, N., & Kind, P. (1993). Testing the validity of the Euroqol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey questionnaire[see comment]. Quality of Life Research, 2, 169–180.PubMedCrossRef Brazier, J., Jones, N., & Kind, P. (1993). Testing the validity of the Euroqol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey questionnaire[see comment]. Quality of Life Research, 2, 169–180.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Sprangers, M. A., Te, V. A., & Aaronson, N. K. (1999). The construction and testing of the EORTC colorectal cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire module (QLQ-CR38). European organization for research and treatment of cancer study group on quality of life. European Journal of Cancer, 35, 238–247.PubMedCrossRef Sprangers, M. A., Te, V. A., & Aaronson, N. K. (1999). The construction and testing of the EORTC colorectal cancer-specific quality of life questionnaire module (QLQ-CR38). European organization for research and treatment of cancer study group on quality of life. European Journal of Cancer, 35, 238–247.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., et al. (1993). The European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85, 365–376.PubMedCrossRef Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., et al. (1993). The European organization for research and treatment of cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85, 365–376.PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Ritchie, J., & Spencer, J. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In A. Bryman & R. Burgess (Eds.), Analysing qualitative data. London: Routledge. Ritchie, J., & Spencer, J. (1994). Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In A. Bryman & R. Burgess (Eds.), Analysing qualitative data. London: Routledge.
16.
go back to reference Smith, A. B., Wright, P., Selby, P., & Velikova, G. A. (2007) Rasch and factor analysis of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-general (FACT-G). Health & Quality of Life Outcomes 5. Smith, A. B., Wright, P., Selby, P., & Velikova, G. A. (2007) Rasch and factor analysis of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-general (FACT-G). Health & Quality of Life Outcomes 5.
17.
go back to reference Luckett, T., King, M. T., Butow, P. N., Oguchi, M., Rankin, N., Price, M. A., et al. (2010). Choosing between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G for measuring health-related quality of life in cancer clinical research: Issues, evidence and recommendations. Annals of Oncology, 22, 2179–2190.CrossRef Luckett, T., King, M. T., Butow, P. N., Oguchi, M., Rankin, N., Price, M. A., et al. (2010). Choosing between the EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G for measuring health-related quality of life in cancer clinical research: Issues, evidence and recommendations. Annals of Oncology, 22, 2179–2190.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Baker, F. (2001). The basics of item response theory. University of Maryland: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation. Baker, F. (2001). The basics of item response theory. University of Maryland: ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation.
19.
go back to reference Mallinson, S. (2002). Listening to respondents: a qualitative assessment of the short-form 36 health status questionnaire. Social Science and Medicine, 54, 11–21.PubMedCrossRef Mallinson, S. (2002). Listening to respondents: a qualitative assessment of the short-form 36 health status questionnaire. Social Science and Medicine, 54, 11–21.PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Kuenstner, S., Langelotz, C., Budach, V., Possinger, K., Krause, B., & Sezer, O. (2002). The comparability of quality of life scores. A multitrait multimethod analysis of the EORTC QLQ-C30, SF-36 and FLIC questionnaires. European Journal of Cancer, 38, 339–348.PubMedCrossRef Kuenstner, S., Langelotz, C., Budach, V., Possinger, K., Krause, B., & Sezer, O. (2002). The comparability of quality of life scores. A multitrait multimethod analysis of the EORTC QLQ-C30, SF-36 and FLIC questionnaires. European Journal of Cancer, 38, 339–348.PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Apolone, G., Filiberti, A., Cifani, S., Ruggiata, R., & Mosconi, P. (1998). Evaluation of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire: a comparison with SF-36 health survey in a cohort of Italian long-survival cancer patients. Annals of Oncology, 9, 549–557.PubMedCrossRef Apolone, G., Filiberti, A., Cifani, S., Ruggiata, R., & Mosconi, P. (1998). Evaluation of the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire: a comparison with SF-36 health survey in a cohort of Italian long-survival cancer patients. Annals of Oncology, 9, 549–557.PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Overcash, J., Extermann, M., Parr, J., Perry, J., & Balducci, L. (2001). Validity and reliability of the FACT-G scale for use in the older person with cancer. American Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24, 591–596.PubMedCrossRef Overcash, J., Extermann, M., Parr, J., Perry, J., & Balducci, L. (2001). Validity and reliability of the FACT-G scale for use in the older person with cancer. American Journal of Clinical Oncology, 24, 591–596.PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Paterson, C. (2004). Seeking the patient’s perspective: a qualitative assessment of EuroQol, COOP-WONCA charts and MYMOP. Quality of Life Research, 13, 871–881.PubMedCrossRef Paterson, C. (2004). Seeking the patient’s perspective: a qualitative assessment of EuroQol, COOP-WONCA charts and MYMOP. Quality of Life Research, 13, 871–881.PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Blazeby, J. M., Kavadas, V., Vickery, C. W., Greenwood, R., Berrisford, R. G., & Alderson, D. (2005). A prospective comparison of quality of life measures for patients with esophageal cancer. Quality of Life Research, 14, 387–393.PubMedCrossRef Blazeby, J. M., Kavadas, V., Vickery, C. W., Greenwood, R., Berrisford, R. G., & Alderson, D. (2005). A prospective comparison of quality of life measures for patients with esophageal cancer. Quality of Life Research, 14, 387–393.PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Kemmler, G., Holzner, B., Kopp, M., Dunser, M., Margreiter, R., Greil, R., et al. (1999). Comparison of two quality-of-life instruments for cancer patients: The functional assessment of cancer therapy-general and the European organization for research and treatment of cancer quality of life questionnaire-C30. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 17, 2932–2940.PubMed Kemmler, G., Holzner, B., Kopp, M., Dunser, M., Margreiter, R., Greil, R., et al. (1999). Comparison of two quality-of-life instruments for cancer patients: The functional assessment of cancer therapy-general and the European organization for research and treatment of cancer quality of life questionnaire-C30. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 17, 2932–2940.PubMed
26.
go back to reference Holzner, B., Kemmler, G., Sperner-Unterweger, B., Kopp, M., Dunser, M., Margreiter, R., et al. (2001). Quality of life measurement in oncology–a matter of the assessment instrument? European Journal of Cancer, 37, 2349–2356.PubMedCrossRef Holzner, B., Kemmler, G., Sperner-Unterweger, B., Kopp, M., Dunser, M., Margreiter, R., et al. (2001). Quality of life measurement in oncology–a matter of the assessment instrument? European Journal of Cancer, 37, 2349–2356.PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Brundage, M., Feldman-Stewart, D., Leis, A., Bezjak, A., Degner, L., & Velji, K. (2009). Communicating quality of life information to cancer patients: A study of six presentation formats. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23, 6949–6956.CrossRef Brundage, M., Feldman-Stewart, D., Leis, A., Bezjak, A., Degner, L., & Velji, K. (2009). Communicating quality of life information to cancer patients: A study of six presentation formats. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 23, 6949–6956.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference 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(4), 714–724.PubMedCrossRef 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(4), 714–724.PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Klinkhammer-Schalke, M., Koller, M., Ehret, C., Steiger, B., Ernst, B., Wyatt, J. C., et al. (2008). Implementing a system of quality-of-life diagnosis and therapy for breast cancer patients: Results of an exploratory trial as a prerequisite for a subsequent RCT. British Journal of Cancer, 99, 415–422.PubMedCrossRef Klinkhammer-Schalke, M., Koller, M., Ehret, C., Steiger, B., Ernst, B., Wyatt, J. C., et al. (2008). Implementing a system of quality-of-life diagnosis and therapy for breast cancer patients: Results of an exploratory trial as a prerequisite for a subsequent RCT. British Journal of Cancer, 99, 415–422.PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Gujral, S., Conroy, T., Fleissner, C., Sezer, O., King, P. M., Avery, K. N., et al. (2007). Assessing quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer: An update of the EORTC quality of life questionnaire. Cancer, 29, 276–281. Gujral, S., Conroy, T., Fleissner, C., Sezer, O., King, P. M., Avery, K. N., et al. (2007). Assessing quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer: An update of the EORTC quality of life questionnaire. Cancer, 29, 276–281.
31.
go back to reference Koller, M., Kussman, J., Lorenz, W., Jenkins, M., Voss, M., Arens, E., et al. (1996). Symptom reporting in cancer patients. Cancer, 77, 983–995.PubMedCrossRef Koller, M., Kussman, J., Lorenz, W., Jenkins, M., Voss, M., Arens, E., et al. (1996). Symptom reporting in cancer patients. Cancer, 77, 983–995.PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Koller, M., Heitman, K., Kussman, J., & Lorenz, W. (1999). Symptom reporting in cancer patients II. Cancer, 86, 1609–1620.PubMedCrossRef Koller, M., Heitman, K., Kussman, J., & Lorenz, W. (1999). Symptom reporting in cancer patients II. Cancer, 86, 1609–1620.PubMedCrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Pitfalls in the interpretation of standardised quality of life instruments for individual patients? A qualitative study in colorectal cancer
Auteurs
Timothy R. Wilson
Yvonne Birks
David J. Alexander
Publicatiedatum
01-09-2013
Uitgeverij
Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 7/2013
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0303-7

Andere artikelen Uitgave 7/2013

Quality of Life Research 7/2013 Naar de uitgave