nach oben

Quality of Life Research

Erschienen in:

01.04.2008

EuroQol EQ-5D and condition-specific measures of health outcome in women with urinary incontinence: reliability, validity and responsiveness

verfasst von: Kirstie L. Haywood, Andrew M. Garratt, Ranjit Lall, Jan Fereday Smith, Sarah E. Lamb

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 3/2008

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the measurement properties of the EuroQoL EQ-5D and two condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures—the Symptom Severity Index (SSI) and the Urinary Incontinence-Specific Quality of Life instrument (I-QoL)—in women with urinary incontinence.

Methods

A questionnaire comprising all instruments was completed by women taking part in a clinical trial of physiotherapy for urinary incontinence. Follow-up questionnaires were at 6 weeks and 5 months. Data quality, internal consistency reliability, validity and responsiveness were assessed.

Results

One hundred and seventy-four patients taking part in the clinical trial completed the questionnaire. Instruments had low levels of missing data. The EQ-5D had a large ceiling effect and poor responsiveness. The SSI had poor validity and responsiveness. The I-QoL had levels of reliability that supported application in group assessment, and in some cases, individual assessment, and good evidence of validity. The I-QoL was the most responsive instrument at both 6 weeks and 5 months.

Conclusion

The I-QoL was the best performing instrument and is recommended as a continence-specific measure of quality of life in a clinical trial setting. The SSI and EQ-5D are not recommended. Alternative generic instruments, which support economic evaluation, require further evaluation in trials of female urinary incontinence.

Norton, N. J. (2004). The perspective of the patient. Gastroenterology, 126, S175–S179.PubMedCrossRef

Miner, P. B., Jr. (2004). Economic and personal impact of fecal and urinary incontinence. Gastroenterology, 126, S8–S13.PubMedCrossRef

Martin, J. L., Williams, K. S., Abrams, K. R., et al. (2006). Systematic review and evaluation of methods of assessing urinary incontinence. Health Technology Assessment, 10(6), 1–132.

Abrams, P., Cardozo, L., Fall, M., Griffiths, D., Rosier, P., et al. (2002). The standardisation of terminology of lower urinary tract function: Report from the Standardisation Sub-committee of the International Continence Society. Neurourology and Urodynamics, 21, 167–178.PubMedCrossRef

Fitzpatrick, R., Davey, C., Buxton, M. J., & Jones, D. R. (1998). Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technology Assessment, 2(i–iv), 1–74.PubMed

Ross, S., Soroka, D., Karahalios, A., Glazener, C. M., Hay-Smith, E. J., & Drutz, H. P. (2005). Incontinence-specific quality of life measures used in trials of treatments for female urinary incontinence: A systematic review. International Urogynecology Journal and Pelvic Floor Dysfunction, 17(3), 272–285.PubMed

Naughton, M. J., Donovan, J., Badia, X., Corcos, J., Gotoh, M., et al. (2004). Symptom severity and QOL scales for urinary incontinence. Gastroenterology, 126, S114–S123.PubMedCrossRef

Symonds, T. (2003). A review of condition-specific instruments to assess the impact of urinary incontinence on health-related quality of life. European Urology, 43, 219–225.PubMedCrossRef

EuroQoL-Group. (1990). EuroQol—a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group. Health Policy, 16, 199–208.CrossRef

10.

Brazier, J., Roberts, J., Tsuchiya, A., & Busschbach, J. (2004). A comparison of the EQ-5D and SF-6D across seven patient groups. Health Economics, 13, 873–884.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Wiebe, S., Guyatt, G., Weaver, B., Matijevic, S., & Sidwell, C. (2003). Comparative responsiveness of generic and specific quality-of-life instruments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56, 52–60.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Scottish-Intercollegiate-Guidelines-Network. (2004). SIGN 79: Management of urinary incontinence in primary care. A national clinical guideline. Edinburgh: Scottish-Intercollegiate-Guidelines-Network.

13.

Department-of-Health. (2000). Good practice in continence services, UK. Department of Health. www.doh.gov.uk/continenceservices.htm.

14.

Lose, G., Fantl, J. A., Victor, A., Walter, S., Wells, T. L., et al. (2001). Outcome measures for research in adult women with symptoms of lower urinary tract dysfunction. Standardization Committee of the International Continence Society. Acta Obstetrica et Gynecologica Scandinavia, 80, 981–985.CrossRef

15.

Garratt, A., Schmidt, L., Mackintosh, A., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2002). Quality of life measurement: Bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. British Medical Journal, 324, 1417.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Black, N., Griffiths, J., & Pope, C. (1996). Development of a symptom severity index and a symptom impact index for stress incontinence in women. Neurourology and Urodynamics, 15, 630–640.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Wagner, T. H., Patrick, D. L., Bavendam, T. G., Martin, M. L., & Buesching, D. P. (1996). Quality of life of persons with urinary incontinence: Development of a new measure. Urology, 47, 67–71.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Patrick, D. L., Martin, M. L., Bushnell, D. M., Yalcin, I., Wagner, T. H., & Buesching, D. P. (1999). Quality of life of women with urinary incontinence: Further development of the incontinence quality of life instrument (I-QOL). Urology, 53, 71–76.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Black, N., Griffiths, J., Pope, C., Bowling, A., & Abel P. (1997). Impact of surgery for stress incontinence on morbidity: Cohort study. British Medical Journal, 315, 1493–1498.PubMed

20.

Bushnell, D. M., Martin, M. L., Summers, K. H., Svihra, J., Lionis, C., & Patrick, D. L. (2005). Quality of life of women with urinary incontinence: Cross-cultural performance of 15 language versions of the I-QOL. Quality of Life Research, 14, 1901–1913.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Marra, C. A., Woolcott, J. C., Kopec, J. A., Shojania, K., Offer, R., et al. (2005). A comparison of generic, indirect utility measures (the HUI2, HUI3, SF-6D, and the EQ-5D) and disease-specific instruments (the RAQoL and the HAQ) in rheumatoid arthritis. Social Science and Medicine, 60, 1571–1582.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Donovan, J. L., Kay, H. E., Peters, T. J., Abrams, P., Coast, J., et al. (1997). Using the ICSOoL to measure the impact of lower urinary tract symptoms on quality of life: Evidence from the ICS-‘BPH’ Study. International Continence Society–Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. British Journal of Urology, 80, 712–721.PubMed

23.

Kobelt, G. (1997). Economic considerations and outcome measurement in urge incontinence. Urology, 50, 100–7; discussion 8–10.

24.

Fuertes, M. E., Garcia Matres, M. J., Gonzalez Romojaro, V., de la Rosa, S., Anguera Vila, A., et al. (2000). Clinical trial to evaluate trospium chloride (Uraplex) effectiveness and tolerance in patients with detrusor instability incontinence and its impact on quality of life. Archivos Españoles de Urologia, 53, 125–136.PubMed

25.

Hawthorne, G. (2006). Measuring incontinence in Australia 2006 (153 pp). Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. ISBN: 0 642 82980 2. http://www.health.gov.au/internet/wcms/publishing.nsf/Content/ageing-continence-measure.htm

26.

Streiner, D., & Norman, G. (2003). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

27.

Jolliffe, I. (1986). Principal component analysis. New York: Springer-Verlag.

28.

Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

29.

Shrout, P., & Fleiss, J. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420–428.CrossRef

30.

Hawthorne, G., Richardson, J., & Osborne, R. (1999). The Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument: a psychometric measure of health related quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 8, 209–224.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis: With readings (4th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Titel: EuroQol EQ-5D and condition-specific measures of health outcome in women with urinary incontinence: reliability, validity and responsiveness
verfasst von: Kirstie L. Haywood
Andrew M. Garratt
Ranjit Lall
Jan Fereday Smith
Sarah E. Lamb
Publikationsdatum: 01.04.2008
Verlag: Springer Netherlands
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 3/2008
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9311-z

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2008

Improving quality of life using compound mind-body therapies: evaluation of a course intervention with body movement and breath therapy, guided imagery, chakra experiencing and mindfulness meditation

Quantification of the level descriptors for the standard EQ-5D three-level system and a five-level version according to two methods

The SF-36 scales are not accurately summarised by independent physical and mental component scores

Trajectory and determinants of the quality of life of family caregivers of terminally ill cancer patients in Taiwan

The validity of generic and condition-specific preference-based instruments: the ability to discriminate asthma control status

Validation of the French version of the colorectal-specific quality-of-life questionnaires EORTC QLQ-CR38 and FACT-C