Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Advances in Therapy 10/2016

28.07.2016 | Original Research

Reliability and Responsiveness of NutriQoL® Questionnaire

verfasst von: Maria Cristina Cuerda, Antonio Apezetxea, Lourdes Carrillo, Felipe Casanueva, Federico Cuesta, Jose Antonio Irles, Maria Nuria Virgili, Miquel Layola, Luis Lizán

Erschienen in: Advances in Therapy | Ausgabe 10/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Introduction

NutriQoL® (Nestlé Health Science, Vevay, Switzerland) is a questionnaire developed to assess the health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) of patients with home enteral nutrition (HEN) irrespective of their underlying condition and route of administration. The aim of this work is assessing the questionnaire’s reliability and responsiveness to change.

Methods

Two cohorts of patients with HEN and their primary caregivers were enrolled to assess reliability and responsiveness, respectively. All participants had to be 18 years of age or older, without mental deterioration (≤3 or 4 errors in the Pfeiffer’s test) and with sufficient functional status (>40 points on Karnovsky’s performance status scale). When the patients’ ability to respond to the questionnaire was impaired due to underlying disease, their caregivers answered on their behalf. NutriQoL was administered in two and three visits to reliability and responsiveness cohorts, respectively. Test–retest reliability and internal consistency were assessed by the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and the Cronbach’s α, respectively. Responsiveness was evaluated by standardized effect size and standardized response mean between basal visit and third visit. Finally, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was estimated.

Results

A total of 54 and 86 participants were recruited to the reliability and responsiveness cohort, respectively. Thirty-five caregivers were selected to assess the inter-observer reliability. ICC values confirmed the good reproducibility level (ICC >0.75) of the questionnaire in both “physical functioning and activities of daily living” and “social life” domains and total score. The assessment of internal consistency in both domains of the questionnaire showed good internal consistency in visit 2. ICC showed the excellent agreement level between caregiver and patient in the global NutriQoL score. Finally, patients classified as having a minimal change in their health reported a mean (standard deviation) MCID in NutriQoL score of 0.63 (11.51).

Conclusion

NutriQoL is a reliable and unique instrument to measure the HRQoL in HEN patients. NutriQoL detects changes in the health status of the patient. Nevertheless, further research is needed to determine the full extent of the questionnaire responsiveness.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Lochs H, Allison SP, Meier R, et al. Introductory to the ESPEN guidelines on enteral nutrition: terminology, definitions and general topics. Clin Nutr. 2006;25(2):180–6.CrossRefPubMed Lochs H, Allison SP, Meier R, et al. Introductory to the ESPEN guidelines on enteral nutrition: terminology, definitions and general topics. Clin Nutr. 2006;25(2):180–6.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat McNamara EP, Food P, Kennedy NP. Home tube feeding: an integrate multidisciplinary approach. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2001;14:13–9.CrossRefPubMed McNamara EP, Food P, Kennedy NP. Home tube feeding: an integrate multidisciplinary approach. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2001;14:13–9.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Bannerman E, Pendlebury J, Phillips F, et al. A crosssectional and longitudinal study of health-related quality of life after percutaneous gastrostomy. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2000;12:1101–9.CrossRefPubMed Bannerman E, Pendlebury J, Phillips F, et al. A crosssectional and longitudinal study of health-related quality of life after percutaneous gastrostomy. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2000;12:1101–9.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Jordan S, Philpin S, Warring J, et al. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomies: the burden of treatment from a patient perspective. J Adv Nurs. 2006;56:270–81.CrossRefPubMed Jordan S, Philpin S, Warring J, et al. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomies: the burden of treatment from a patient perspective. J Adv Nurs. 2006;56:270–81.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Stevens CS, Lemon B, Lockwood GA, Waldron JN, Bezjak A, Ringash J. The development and validation of a quality-of-life questionnaire for head and neck cancer patients with enteral feeding tubes: the QOL-EF. Support Care Cancer. 2011;19(8):1175–82.CrossRefPubMed Stevens CS, Lemon B, Lockwood GA, Waldron JN, Bezjak A, Ringash J. The development and validation of a quality-of-life questionnaire for head and neck cancer patients with enteral feeding tubes: the QOL-EF. Support Care Cancer. 2011;19(8):1175–82.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Schneider SM, Pouget I, Staccini P, et al. Quality of life in long-term home enteral nutrition patients. Clin Nutr. 2000;19(1):23–8.CrossRefPubMed Schneider SM, Pouget I, Staccini P, et al. Quality of life in long-term home enteral nutrition patients. Clin Nutr. 2000;19(1):23–8.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Wanden-Berghe C, Nolasco A, Sanz-Valero J, Planas M, Cuerda C, Group NADYA-SENPE. Health-related quality of life in patients with home nutritional support. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2009;22(3):219–25.CrossRefPubMed Wanden-Berghe C, Nolasco A, Sanz-Valero J, Planas M, Cuerda C, Group NADYA-SENPE. Health-related quality of life in patients with home nutritional support. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2009;22(3):219–25.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Bjuresäter K, Larsson M, Athlin E, et al. Patients living with home enteral tube feeding: side effects, health-related quality of life and nutritional care. Clin Nurs Studies. 2014;2(3):64–75. Bjuresäter K, Larsson M, Athlin E, et al. Patients living with home enteral tube feeding: side effects, health-related quality of life and nutritional care. Clin Nurs Studies. 2014;2(3):64–75.
9.
Zurück zum Zitat García de Yébenes Prous MJ, Rodriguez Salvanes F, Carmona Ortells L. Validación de cuestionarios. Reumatol Clin. 2009;5(4):171–7.CrossRefPubMed García de Yébenes Prous MJ, Rodriguez Salvanes F, Carmona Ortells L. Validación de cuestionarios. Reumatol Clin. 2009;5(4):171–7.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Hernández I, Porta M, Miralles M, et al. La cuantifiación de la variabilidad en las observaciones clínicas. Med Clin (Barc). 1990;95:424–9. Hernández I, Porta M, Miralles M, et al. La cuantifiación de la variabilidad en las observaciones clínicas. Med Clin (Barc). 1990;95:424–9.
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Prieto L, Lamarca R, Casado A. La evaluación de la fiabilidad en las observaciones clínicas: el coeficiente de correlación intraclase. Med Clin (Barc). 1998;110:142–5. Prieto L, Lamarca R, Casado A. La evaluación de la fiabilidad en las observaciones clínicas: el coeficiente de correlación intraclase. Med Clin (Barc). 1998;110:142–5.
12.
Zurück zum Zitat , et al. Health-related quality of life according to the main caregiver in patients with home nutritional support. Med Clin (Barc). 2008;131(8):281–4.PubMed , et al. Health-related quality of life according to the main caregiver in patients with home nutritional support. Med Clin (Barc). 2008;131(8):281–4.PubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Terwee CB, Dekker FW, Wiersinga WM, et al. On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation. Qual Life Res. 2003;12:349–62.CrossRefPubMed Terwee CB, Dekker FW, Wiersinga WM, et al. On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation. Qual Life Res. 2003;12:349–62.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, et al. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(5):459–68.CrossRefPubMed Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, et al. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(5):459–68.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, et al. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(2):102–9.CrossRefPubMed Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, et al. Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(2):102–9.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Martínez de la Iglesia J, Dueñas Herrero R, Onís Vilches MC, Aguado Taberné C, Albert Colomer C, Luque Luque R. Spanish language adaptation and validation of the Pfeiffer’s questionnaire (SPMSQ) to detect cognitive deterioration in people over 65 years of age. Med Clin (Barc). 2001;117(4):129–34.CrossRef Martínez de la Iglesia J, Dueñas Herrero R, Onís Vilches MC, Aguado Taberné C, Albert Colomer C, Luque Luque R. Spanish language adaptation and validation of the Pfeiffer’s questionnaire (SPMSQ) to detect cognitive deterioration in people over 65 years of age. Med Clin (Barc). 2001;117(4):129–34.CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Pfeiffer E. A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderl y patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1975;23:433–41.CrossRefPubMed Pfeiffer E. A short portable mental status questionnaire for the assessment of organic brain deficit in elderl y patients. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1975;23:433–41.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Schag CC, Heinrich RL, Ganz PA. Karnofsky performance status revisited: reliability, validity, and guidelines. J Clin Oncology. 1984;2:187–93. Schag CC, Heinrich RL, Ganz PA. Karnofsky performance status revisited: reliability, validity, and guidelines. J Clin Oncology. 1984;2:187–93.
20.
Zurück zum Zitat López de Ullibarri I, Pita S. Medidas de concordancia: el índice de Kappa. Cad Aten Primaria. 1999;6:169–71. López de Ullibarri I, Pita S. Medidas de concordancia: el índice de Kappa. Cad Aten Primaria. 1999;6:169–71.
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Ghandi PK, Ried LD, Bibbey A, et al. SF-6D utility index as measure of minimally important difference in health status change. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2012;52(1):34–42.CrossRef Ghandi PK, Ried LD, Bibbey A, et al. SF-6D utility index as measure of minimally important difference in health status change. J Am Pharm Assoc (2003). 2012;52(1):34–42.CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Osin M, Wongchinsri J, Ukrichon S, Hanvivadhanakul P, Kasitanon N, Siripaitoon B. Comprenhensibility, reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Thai version of the Health Assessment Questionnaire in Thai patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2009;11(4):R129.CrossRef Osin M, Wongchinsri J, Ukrichon S, Hanvivadhanakul P, Kasitanon N, Siripaitoon B. Comprenhensibility, reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Thai version of the Health Assessment Questionnaire in Thai patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2009;11(4):R129.CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476):307–10.CrossRefPubMed Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1(8476):307–10.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Reliability and Responsiveness of NutriQoL® Questionnaire
verfasst von
Maria Cristina Cuerda
Antonio Apezetxea
Lourdes Carrillo
Felipe Casanueva
Federico Cuesta
Jose Antonio Irles
Maria Nuria Virgili
Miquel Layola
Luis Lizán
Publikationsdatum
28.07.2016
Verlag
Springer Healthcare
Erschienen in
Advances in Therapy / Ausgabe 10/2016
Print ISSN: 0741-238X
Elektronische ISSN: 1865-8652
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-016-0384-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 10/2016

Advances in Therapy 10/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.