REVIEW
Measuring quality of life in stroke.
Stroke; a Journal of Cerebral Circulation 1993 Februrary
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Little attention has been focused on quality of life in stroke outcome research. The purpose of this review is to outline the meaning of the concept, describe important methodological issues and methods of assessment, review existing quality of life measures, and discuss criteria for selecting an appropriate instrument.
SUMMARY OF REVIEW: The following 10 quality of life instruments were reviewed: COOP Charts; Euroqol; Frenchay Activities Index; Karnofsky Performance Status Scale; McMaster Health Index Questionnaire; Medical Outcomes Study 20-Item Short-Form Health Survey; Nottingham Health Profile; Quality of Life Index; Quality of Well-being Scale; and the Sickness Impact Profile. They were evaluated in terms of length, time needed to complete, content, scoring, and psychometric characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: Emphasis should be placed on further psychometric evaluation of existing quality of life measures rather than on generating new instruments. There is particular need for supplementary data on the responsiveness of the instruments to changes in patients' clinical status over time. The choice of a suitable quality of life instrument should be based not only on psychometric properties but also on careful consideration of the research question, the relevance to the objectives of the study, the feasibility of the instrument, and the specific characteristics of the stroke patients under investigation.
SUMMARY OF REVIEW: The following 10 quality of life instruments were reviewed: COOP Charts; Euroqol; Frenchay Activities Index; Karnofsky Performance Status Scale; McMaster Health Index Questionnaire; Medical Outcomes Study 20-Item Short-Form Health Survey; Nottingham Health Profile; Quality of Life Index; Quality of Well-being Scale; and the Sickness Impact Profile. They were evaluated in terms of length, time needed to complete, content, scoring, and psychometric characteristics.
CONCLUSIONS: Emphasis should be placed on further psychometric evaluation of existing quality of life measures rather than on generating new instruments. There is particular need for supplementary data on the responsiveness of the instruments to changes in patients' clinical status over time. The choice of a suitable quality of life instrument should be based not only on psychometric properties but also on careful consideration of the research question, the relevance to the objectives of the study, the feasibility of the instrument, and the specific characteristics of the stroke patients under investigation.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Helicobacter pylori Infection: Current Status and Future Prospects on Diagnostic, Therapeutic and Control Challenges.Antibiotics 2023 January 18
Fluid Resuscitation in Patients with Cirrhosis and Sepsis: A Multidisciplinary Perspective.Journal of Hepatology 2023 March 2
Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists Versus Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.Cardiology Research 2023 Februrary
Evaluation and Management of Pulmonary Hypertension in Noncardiac Surgery: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2023 March 17
Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses.Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2023 January 31
Long COVID: major findings, mechanisms and recommendations.Nature Reviews. Microbiology 2023 January 14
What's New in the Treatment of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease (NAFLD).Journal of Clinical Medicine 2023 Februrary 27
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app