Nazafarin Esfandiari, Hasina Samji, David G T Whitehurst
{"title":"继发性健康状况对加拿大脊髓损伤患者生活质量和福祉的影响:比较从通用标准化工具中得出的偏好加权指数得分。","authors":"Nazafarin Esfandiari, Hasina Samji, David G T Whitehurst","doi":"10.1080/10790268.2024.2391597","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context/objectives: </strong>To compare the assessment of the impact of secondary health conditions (SHCs) on the quality of life and wellbeing of Canadians living with spinal cord injury (SCI) using four preference-based outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Secondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional, online survey.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Community.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Community-dwelling adults (n = 364) living with traumatic or non-traumatic spinal cord injury at least one year post-injury (70% at least 10 years post-injury).</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>A modified version of the Spinal Cord Injury Secondary Conditions Scale (SCI-SCS); three health-related instruments (EQ-5D-5L, Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3), and the Assessment of Quality of Life 8-dimension questionnaire (AQoL-8D)) and a capability wellbeing instrument (ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A)).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across unadjusted and controlled analyses (i.e. controlling for associations between index scores and sociodemographic and impairment characteristics), trends were observed that identified lower levels of quality of life/wellbeing with higher problem ratings for each of the SHCs. Despite the trends, there was considerable variation in mean index scores across instruments, with HUI3 scores the lowest of the health-related instruments and ICECAP-A scores the highest overall. Respiratory problems, depression/mood problems, pressure sores, and autonomic dysreflexia were associated with the lowest levels of quality of life and wellbeing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Higher problem ratings for SHCs are negatively associated with scores derived from preference-based quality of life and wellbeing instruments. Variation in index scores across instruments - including across the health-related instruments alone - highlights the critical importance of assessing the <i>relative</i> merits of preference-based instruments when using (or considering using) these instruments/estimates in comparative effectiveness research and economic evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":50044,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of secondary health conditions on the quality of life and wellbeing of Canadians living with spinal cord injury: A comparison of preference-weighted index scores derived from generic standardized instruments.\",\"authors\":\"Nazafarin Esfandiari, Hasina Samji, David G T Whitehurst\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10790268.2024.2391597\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context/objectives: </strong>To compare the assessment of the impact of secondary health conditions (SHCs) on the quality of life and wellbeing of Canadians living with spinal cord injury (SCI) using four preference-based outcome measures.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Secondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional, online survey.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Community.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Community-dwelling adults (n = 364) living with traumatic or non-traumatic spinal cord injury at least one year post-injury (70% at least 10 years post-injury).</p><p><strong>Outcome measures: </strong>A modified version of the Spinal Cord Injury Secondary Conditions Scale (SCI-SCS); three health-related instruments (EQ-5D-5L, Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3), and the Assessment of Quality of Life 8-dimension questionnaire (AQoL-8D)) and a capability wellbeing instrument (ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A)).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across unadjusted and controlled analyses (i.e. controlling for associations between index scores and sociodemographic and impairment characteristics), trends were observed that identified lower levels of quality of life/wellbeing with higher problem ratings for each of the SHCs. Despite the trends, there was considerable variation in mean index scores across instruments, with HUI3 scores the lowest of the health-related instruments and ICECAP-A scores the highest overall. Respiratory problems, depression/mood problems, pressure sores, and autonomic dysreflexia were associated with the lowest levels of quality of life and wellbeing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Higher problem ratings for SHCs are negatively associated with scores derived from preference-based quality of life and wellbeing instruments. Variation in index scores across instruments - including across the health-related instruments alone - highlights the critical importance of assessing the <i>relative</i> merits of preference-based instruments when using (or considering using) these instruments/estimates in comparative effectiveness research and economic evaluation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50044,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2024.2391597\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10790268.2024.2391597","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景/目标:使用四种基于偏好的结果测量方法,比较评估继发性健康状况(SHC)对加拿大脊髓损伤(SCI)患者的生活质量和福祉的影响:设计:对横断面在线调查数据进行二次分析:环境:社区:结果测量:结果测量:脊髓损伤次要状况量表(SCI-SCS)修订版;三种健康相关工具(EQ-5D-5L、健康效用指数 Mark 3 (HUI3)、生活质量评估 8 维问卷 (AQoL-8D))和一种能力福利工具(ICEpop CAP 能力成人测量法 (ICECAP-A)):在未经调整和控制的分析中(即控制指数得分与社会人口学和损伤特征之间的关联),观察到的趋势表明,生活质量/幸福感水平越低,每种特困人群的问题评级就越高。尽管存在这些趋势,但不同工具的平均指数得分差异很大,在与健康相关的工具中,HUI3 的得分最低,而 ICECAP-A 的总体得分最高。呼吸系统问题、抑郁/情绪问题、压疮和自主神经反射障碍与生活质量和幸福感的最低水平相关:结论:对特困人员的问题评分越高,其与基于偏好的生活质量和幸福感工具得出的分数呈负相关。不同工具(包括仅与健康相关的工具)的指数得分存在差异,这凸显了在比较效果研究和经济评估中使用(或考虑使用)基于偏好的工具/估计值时,评估这些工具的相对优点至关重要。
Impact of secondary health conditions on the quality of life and wellbeing of Canadians living with spinal cord injury: A comparison of preference-weighted index scores derived from generic standardized instruments.
Context/objectives: To compare the assessment of the impact of secondary health conditions (SHCs) on the quality of life and wellbeing of Canadians living with spinal cord injury (SCI) using four preference-based outcome measures.
Design: Secondary analysis of data from a cross-sectional, online survey.
Setting: Community.
Participants: Community-dwelling adults (n = 364) living with traumatic or non-traumatic spinal cord injury at least one year post-injury (70% at least 10 years post-injury).
Outcome measures: A modified version of the Spinal Cord Injury Secondary Conditions Scale (SCI-SCS); three health-related instruments (EQ-5D-5L, Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3), and the Assessment of Quality of Life 8-dimension questionnaire (AQoL-8D)) and a capability wellbeing instrument (ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults (ICECAP-A)).
Results: Across unadjusted and controlled analyses (i.e. controlling for associations between index scores and sociodemographic and impairment characteristics), trends were observed that identified lower levels of quality of life/wellbeing with higher problem ratings for each of the SHCs. Despite the trends, there was considerable variation in mean index scores across instruments, with HUI3 scores the lowest of the health-related instruments and ICECAP-A scores the highest overall. Respiratory problems, depression/mood problems, pressure sores, and autonomic dysreflexia were associated with the lowest levels of quality of life and wellbeing.
Conclusions: Higher problem ratings for SHCs are negatively associated with scores derived from preference-based quality of life and wellbeing instruments. Variation in index scores across instruments - including across the health-related instruments alone - highlights the critical importance of assessing the relative merits of preference-based instruments when using (or considering using) these instruments/estimates in comparative effectiveness research and economic evaluation.
期刊介绍:
For more than three decades, The Journal of Spinal Cord Medicine has reflected the evolution of the field of spinal cord medicine. From its inception as a newsletter for physicians striving to provide the best of care, JSCM has matured into an international journal that serves professionals from all disciplines—medicine, nursing, therapy, engineering, psychology and social work.