Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 8/2020

09-05-2020

Proxy reliability of the 12-item world health organization disability assessment schedule II among adult patients with mental disorders

Auteurs: Wei Zhou, Qian Liu, Yu Yu, Shuiyuan Xiao, Lizhang Chen, Kaveh Khoshnood, Shimin Zheng

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 8/2020

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
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

Despite the wide usage of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS 2.0) in psychiatry research and clinical practice, there was limited knowledge on its proxy reliability among people with mental disorders. This paper aimed to compare the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 responses of adult patients with mental disorders to their family caregivers.

Methods

In this study, 205 pairs of patients with mental disorders and primary family caregivers were consecutively recruited from one inpatient mental health department in a large hospital in China. All participants completed the 12-item version WHODAS 2.0 to assess patients’ functioning in the 30 days prior to the hospitalization. Measurement invariance, including configural, metric and scalar invariance, was tested across patient and proxy groups, using multi-group confirmatory factor analysis. Agreement between patients and proxies was examined by paired Wilcoxon tests and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Subgroup analyses for proxy reliability were conducted within strata of proxy kinship and patient psychiatric diagnosis.

Results

The 12-item WHODAS 2.0 achieved configural, metric and partial scalar invariance across patient and proxy groups. Unsatisfactory consistency was found for most items (ICC < 0.75, P < 0.05), especially for items on Cognition, Getting along, Life activities, and Participation in society (ICC < 0.4, P < 0.05). Spouses agreed with patients more often than parents (ICC ≥ 0.4, P < 0.05). The paired Wilcoxon tests found that impairment of patients with psychotic disorders tended to be overestimated by proxies while proxies tended to underestimate impairment of patients with mood disorders.

Conclusion

Our study reveals inconsistency between self and proxy reports in the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 among adult patients with mental disorders. When proxy reports is needed, spouses are preferred than parents. We should be aware of proxies’ impairment overestimation among patients with psychotic disorders and underestimation among patients with mood disorders.
vorige artikel Quality of life and mental health in adolescent users of oral contraceptives. Results from the nationwide, representative German Health Interview and Examination Survey for Children and Adolescents (KiGGS)
volgende artikel Minimal important change in physical function in trauma patients: a study using the short musculoskeletal function assessment
Literatuur
1.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). The diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association.CrossRef
2.
Becker, A. E., & Kleinman, A. (2013). Mental health and the global agenda. The New England Journal of Medicine,369(1), 66–73.CrossRef
3.
GBD 2017 Disease and Injury Incidence and Prevalence Collaborators. (2017). Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet,392(10159), 1789–1858.
4.
Ustün, T. B., Chatterji, S., Kostanjsek, N., Rehm, J., Kennedy, C., Epping-Jordan, J., et al. (2010). Developing the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0. Bulletin of the World Health Organization,88(11), 815–823.CrossRef
5.
6.
Buist-Bouwman, M. A., Ormel, J., De Graaf, R., Vilagut, G., Alonso, J., Van Sonderen, E., et al. (2008). Psychometric properties of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule used in the European Study of the Epidemiology of Mental Disorders. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research,17, 185–197.CrossRef
7.
Federici, S., Bracalenti, M., Meloni, F., & Luciano, J. (2017). World Health Organization disability assessment schedule 2.0: An international systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation,39(23), 2347–2380.CrossRef
8.
Gold, L. H. (2014). DSM-5 and the assessment of functioning: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law,42, 173–181.PubMed
9.
Schlote, A., Richter, M., Wunderlich, M. T., Poppendick, U., Möller, C., & Wallesch, C. W. (2008). Use of the WHODAS II with stroke patients and their relatives: reliability and inter-rater-reliability. Rehabilitation (Stuttg),47(1), 31–38.CrossRef
10.
Lapin, B. R., Thompson, N. R., Schuster, A., & Katzan, I. L. (2019). Patient versus proxy response on global health scales: No meaningful DIFference. Quality of Life Resesarch,28(6), 1585–1594.CrossRef
11.
Chen, C. Y., Liu, C. Y., & Liang, H. Y. (2009). Comparison of patient and caregiver assessments of depressive symptoms in elderly patients with depression. Psychiatry Research,166(1), 69–75.CrossRef
12.
Koch, A. D., Vogel, A., Becker, T., Salize, H. J., Voss, E., Werner, A., et al. (2015). Proxy and self-reported Quality of Life in adults with intellectual disabilities: Impact of psychiatric symptoms, problem behaviour, psychotropic medication and unmet needs. Research in Developmental Disabilities,45–46, 136–146.CrossRef
13.
Andresen, E. M., Vahle, V. J., & Lollar, D. (2001). Proxy reliability: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures for people with disability. Quality of Life Research,10(7), 609–619.CrossRef
14.
Schoot, R., Lugtig, P., & Hox, J. (2012). A checklist for testing measurement invariance. European Journal of Developmental Psychology,9(4), 486–492.CrossRef
15.
Iliceto, P., Pompili, M., Candilera, G., Borges, G., Lamis, D. A., Serafini, G., et al. (2013). Suicide risk and psychopathology in immigrants: A multi-group confirmatory factor analysis. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology,48(7), 1105–1114.CrossRef
16.
17.
Hays, R. D., Revicki, D., & Coyne, K. S. (2005). Application of structural equation modeling to health outcomes research. Evaluation Health Professions,28(3), 295–309.CrossRef
18.
Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of goodness of fit indexes to lack of measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling,14(3), 464–504.CrossRef
19.
Rosner, B. (2006). Fundamentals of biostatistics (6th ed.). Duxbury: Thomson Brooks/Cole.
20.
Niu, L., Jia, C., Ma, Z., Wang, G., Yu, Z., & Zhou, L. (2018). Validating the Geriatric Depression Scale with proxy-based data: A case-control psychological autopsy study in rural China. Journal of Affective Disorders,241, 533–538.CrossRef
21.
Bruton, A., Conway, J. H., & Holgate, S. T. (2000). Reliability: What is it and how is it measured? Physiotherapy,86(2), 94–99.CrossRef
22.
Zaki, R., Bulgiba, A., Ismail, R., & Ismail, N. A. (2012). Statistical methods used to test for agreement of medical instruments measuring continuous variables in method comparison studies: A systematic review. PLoS ONE,7(5), e37908.CrossRef
23.
McCrum-Gardner, E. (2008). Which is the correct statistical test to use? British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery,46(1), 38–41.CrossRef
24.
Hermont, A. P., Scarpelli, A. C., Paiva, S. M., Auad, S. M., & Pordeus, I. A. (2015). Anxiety and worry when coping with cancer treatment: Agreement between patient and proxy responses. Quality of Life Research,24(6), 1389–1396.CrossRef
25.
Niu, L., Jia, C., Ma, Z., Wang, G., Yu, Z., & Zhou, L. (2018). The validity of proxy-based data on loneliness in suicide research: A case-control psychological autopsy study in rural China. BMC Psychiatry,18(1), 116.CrossRef
26.
Rankin, J. A., Tomeny, T. S., & Barry, T. D. (2017). Multi-informant assessment of siblings of youth with autism spectrum disorder: Parent-child discrepancies in at-risk classification. Research in Developmental Disabilities,68, 78–87.CrossRef
27.
Farrow, D. C., & Samet, J. M. (1990). Comparability of information provided by elderly cancer patients and surrogates regarding health and functional status, social network, and life events. Epidemiology,1(5), 370–376.CrossRef
28.
Lei, X., Strauss, J., Tian, M., & Zhao, Y. (2015). Living arrangements of the elderly in China: Evidence from the CHARLS national baseline. China Economic Journal,8(3), 191–214.CrossRef
29.
Matsudaira, J. D. (2015). Economic conditions and the living arrangements of young adults: 1960 to 2011. Journal of Population Economics,29, 167–195.CrossRef
30.
Herrman, H., Hawthorne, G., & Thomas, R. (2002). Quality of life assessment in people living with psychosis. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology,37(11), 510–518.CrossRef
31.
Liraud, F., Droulout, T., Parrot, M., & Verdoux, H. (2004). Agreement between self-rated and clinically assessed symptoms in subjects with psychosis. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease,192(5), 352–356.CrossRef
32.
Warman, D. M., Lysaker, P. H., & Martin, J. M. (2007). Cognitive insight and psychotic disorder: The impact of active delusions. Schizophrenia Research,90(1–3), 325–333.CrossRef
33.
Ben-Zeev, D., McHugo, G. J., Xie, H., Dobbins, K., & Young, M. A. (2012). Comparing retrospective reports to real-time/real-place mobile assessments in individuals with schizophrenia and a nonclinical comparison group. Schizophrenia Bulletin,38(3), 396–404.CrossRef
34.
Brill, N., Reichenberg, A., Rabinowitz, J., Harary, E., Lubin, G., Davidson, M., et al. (2007). Accuracy of self-reported premorbid functioning in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research,97, 103–108.CrossRef
35.
Caqueo-Urízar, A., & Gutiérrez-Maldonado, J. (2006). Burden of care in families of patients with schizophrenia. Quality of Life Research,15(4), 719–724.CrossRef
36.
Yu, Y., Liu, Z. W., Tang, B. W., Zhao, M., Liu, X. G., & Xiao, S. Y. (2017). Reported family burden of schizophrenia patients in rural China. PLoS ONE,12(6), e0179425.CrossRef
37.
Wang, X., Chen, Q., & Yang, M. (2017). Effect of caregivers' expressed emotion on the care burden and re-hospitalization rate of schizophrenia. Patient Preference and Adherence,11, 1505–1511.CrossRef
38.
Long, K., Sudha, S., & Mutran, E. J. (1998). Elder-proxy agreement concerning the functional status and medical history of the older person: The impact of caregiver burden and depressive symptomatology. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society,46(9), 1103–1111.CrossRef
39.
Kahn, J. H., & Garrison, A. M. (2009). Emotional self-disclosure and emotional avoidance: Relations with symptoms of depression and anxiety. Journal of Counseling Psychology,56(4), 573–584.CrossRef
40.
Caputo, A. (2017). Social desirability bias in self-reported well-being measures: Evidence from an online survey. Universitas Psychologica,16(2), 245–255.CrossRef
41.
Phillips, M. R., Zhang, J., Shi, Q., Song, Z., Ding, Z., Pang, S., et al. (2009). Prevalence, treatment, and associated disability of mental disorders in four provinces in China during 2001–05: An epidemiological survey. Lancet,373(9680), 2041–2053.CrossRef
42.
Yu, Y., Zhou, W., Liu, Z. W., Hu, M., Tan, Z. H., & Xiao, S. Y. (2019). Gender differences in caregiving among a schizophrenia population. Psychology Research and Behavior Management,12, 7–13.CrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Proxy reliability of the 12-item world health organization disability assessment schedule II among adult patients with mental disorders
Auteurs
Wei Zhou
Qian Liu
Yu Yu
Shuiyuan Xiao
Lizhang Chen
Kaveh Khoshnood
Shimin Zheng
Publicatiedatum
09-05-2020
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 8/2020
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02474-w

Andere artikelen Uitgave 8/2020

Quality of Life Research 8/2020 Naar de uitgave

OriginalPaper

Long-term health-related quality of life after surgery in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension

OriginalPaper

Do response styles affect the predictive validity of self-rated health among Chinese older men and women?

OriginalPaper

Quality of life in patients with severe mental illness: a cross-sectional survey in an integrated outpatient health care model

OriginalPaper

Challenges and lessons learned from using anchoring vignettes to explore quality of life response behavior

OriginalPaper

Patient-reported outcomes in melanoma survivors at 1, 3 and 5 years post-diagnosis: a population-based cross-sectional study

OriginalPaper

Role of depressive symptoms in the health-related quality of life of Venezuelan patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Results from a tertiary care center