使用居家养老服务的老年人的生活质量-养老消费者(QOL-ACC)和 EQ-5D-5L 的可靠性。

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Jyoti Khadka, Rachel Milte, Claire Hutchinson, Jenny Cleland, Julie Ratcliffe
{"title":"使用居家养老服务的老年人的生活质量-养老消费者(QOL-ACC)和 EQ-5D-5L 的可靠性。","authors":"Jyoti Khadka, Rachel Milte, Claire Hutchinson, Jenny Cleland, Julie Ratcliffe","doi":"10.1186/s12955-024-02257-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The Quality of Life-Aged Care Consumers (QOL-ACC), a valid preference-based instrument, has been rolled out in Australia as part of the National Quality Indicator (QI) program since April 2023 to monitor and benchmark the quality of life of aged care recipients. As the QOL-ACC is being used to collect quality of life data longitudinally as one of the key aged care QI indicators, it is imperative to establish the reliability of the QOL-ACC in aged care settings. Therefore, we aimed to assess the reliability of the QOL-ACC and compare its performance with the EQ-5D-5L.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Home care recipients completed a survey including the QOL-ACC, EQ-5D-5L and two global items for health and quality of life at baseline (T1) and 2 weeks later (T2). Using T1 and T2 data, the Gwet's AC2 and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were estimated for the dimension levels and overall scores agreements respectively. The standard error of measurement (SEM) and the smallest detectable change (SDC) were also calculated. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for respondents who did not change their response to global item of quality of life and health between T1 and T2.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 83 respondents who completed T1 and T2 surveys, 78 respondents (mean ± SD age, 73.6 ± 5.3 years; 56.4% females) reported either no or one level change in their health and/or quality of life between T1 and T2. Gwet's AC2 ranged from 0.46 to 0.63 for the QOL-ACC dimensions which were comparable to the EQ-5D-5L dimensions (Gwet's AC2 ranged from 0.52 to 0.77). The ICC for the QOL-ACC (0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.90) was comparable to the EQ-5D-5L (0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.88). The SEM for the QOL-ACC (0.08) was slightly smaller than for the EQ-5D-5L (0.11). The SDC for the QOL-ACC and the EQ-5D-5L for individual subjects were 0.22 and 0.30 respectively. Sensitivity analyses stratified by quality of life and health status confirmed the base case results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The QOL-ACC demonstrated a good test-retest reliability similar to the EQ-5D-5L, supporting its repeated use in aged care settings. Further studies will provide evidence of responsiveness of the QOL-ACC to aged care-specific interventions in aged care settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":12980,"journal":{"name":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","volume":"22 1","pages":"40"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11140901/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reliability of the quality of life-aged care consumers (QOL-ACC) and EQ-5D-5L among older people using aged care services at home.\",\"authors\":\"Jyoti Khadka, Rachel Milte, Claire Hutchinson, Jenny Cleland, Julie Ratcliffe\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12955-024-02257-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The Quality of Life-Aged Care Consumers (QOL-ACC), a valid preference-based instrument, has been rolled out in Australia as part of the National Quality Indicator (QI) program since April 2023 to monitor and benchmark the quality of life of aged care recipients. As the QOL-ACC is being used to collect quality of life data longitudinally as one of the key aged care QI indicators, it is imperative to establish the reliability of the QOL-ACC in aged care settings. Therefore, we aimed to assess the reliability of the QOL-ACC and compare its performance with the EQ-5D-5L.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Home care recipients completed a survey including the QOL-ACC, EQ-5D-5L and two global items for health and quality of life at baseline (T1) and 2 weeks later (T2). Using T1 and T2 data, the Gwet's AC2 and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were estimated for the dimension levels and overall scores agreements respectively. The standard error of measurement (SEM) and the smallest detectable change (SDC) were also calculated. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for respondents who did not change their response to global item of quality of life and health between T1 and T2.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 83 respondents who completed T1 and T2 surveys, 78 respondents (mean ± SD age, 73.6 ± 5.3 years; 56.4% females) reported either no or one level change in their health and/or quality of life between T1 and T2. Gwet's AC2 ranged from 0.46 to 0.63 for the QOL-ACC dimensions which were comparable to the EQ-5D-5L dimensions (Gwet's AC2 ranged from 0.52 to 0.77). The ICC for the QOL-ACC (0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.90) was comparable to the EQ-5D-5L (0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.88). The SEM for the QOL-ACC (0.08) was slightly smaller than for the EQ-5D-5L (0.11). The SDC for the QOL-ACC and the EQ-5D-5L for individual subjects were 0.22 and 0.30 respectively. Sensitivity analyses stratified by quality of life and health status confirmed the base case results.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The QOL-ACC demonstrated a good test-retest reliability similar to the EQ-5D-5L, supporting its repeated use in aged care settings. Further studies will provide evidence of responsiveness of the QOL-ACC to aged care-specific interventions in aged care settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12980,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes\",\"volume\":\"22 1\",\"pages\":\"40\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11140901/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-024-02257-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and Quality of Life Outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-024-02257-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:自 2023 年 4 月起,作为国家质量指标 (QI) 计划的一部分,生活质量--老年护理消费者 (QOL-ACC) 这一基于偏好的有效工具已在澳大利亚推出,用于监测和基准老年护理对象的生活质量。由于 QOL-ACC 被用作纵向收集生活质量数据的主要老年护理质量指标之一,因此必须确定 QOL-ACC 在老年护理环境中的可靠性。因此,我们的目标是评估 QOL-ACC 的可靠性,并将其与 EQ-5D-5L 进行比较。方法:居家护理受助者在基线(T1)和两周后(T2)完成一项调查,内容包括 QOL-ACC、EQ-5D-5L 以及两个有关健康和生活质量的全局项目。利用 T1 和 T2 数据,分别估算了维度水平和总分协议的 Gwet's AC2 和类内相关系数 (ICC)。此外,还计算了测量标准误差(SEM)和最小可测变化(SDC)。对于在 T1 和 T2 之间没有改变对生活质量和健康总体项目回答的受访者进行了敏感性分析:在完成 T1 和 T2 调查的 83 位受访者中,78 位受访者(平均 ± SD 年龄,73.6 ± 5.3 岁;56.4% 为女性)表示其健康和/或生活质量在 T1 和 T2 之间没有或仅有一级变化。QOL-ACC 维度的 Gwet's AC2 介于 0.46 至 0.63 之间,与 EQ-5D-5L 维度相当(Gwet's AC2 介于 0.52 至 0.77 之间)。QOL-ACC 的 ICC 值(0.85;95% CI,0.77-0.90)与 EQ-5D-5L 的 ICC 值(0.83;95% CI,0.74-0.88)相当。QOL-ACC 的 SEM(0.08)略小于 EQ-5D-5L(0.11)。单个受试者的 QOL-ACC 和 EQ-5D-5L 的 SDC 分别为 0.22 和 0.30。根据生活质量和健康状况进行的分层敏感性分析证实了基础病例的结果:结论:QOL-ACC与EQ-5D-5L相似,具有良好的重复测试可靠性,支持在老年护理环境中重复使用。进一步的研究将为 QOL-ACC 在老年护理环境中对老年护理特定干预措施的响应性提供证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reliability of the quality of life-aged care consumers (QOL-ACC) and EQ-5D-5L among older people using aged care services at home.

Purpose: The Quality of Life-Aged Care Consumers (QOL-ACC), a valid preference-based instrument, has been rolled out in Australia as part of the National Quality Indicator (QI) program since April 2023 to monitor and benchmark the quality of life of aged care recipients. As the QOL-ACC is being used to collect quality of life data longitudinally as one of the key aged care QI indicators, it is imperative to establish the reliability of the QOL-ACC in aged care settings. Therefore, we aimed to assess the reliability of the QOL-ACC and compare its performance with the EQ-5D-5L.

Methods: Home care recipients completed a survey including the QOL-ACC, EQ-5D-5L and two global items for health and quality of life at baseline (T1) and 2 weeks later (T2). Using T1 and T2 data, the Gwet's AC2 and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were estimated for the dimension levels and overall scores agreements respectively. The standard error of measurement (SEM) and the smallest detectable change (SDC) were also calculated. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for respondents who did not change their response to global item of quality of life and health between T1 and T2.

Results: Of the 83 respondents who completed T1 and T2 surveys, 78 respondents (mean ± SD age, 73.6 ± 5.3 years; 56.4% females) reported either no or one level change in their health and/or quality of life between T1 and T2. Gwet's AC2 ranged from 0.46 to 0.63 for the QOL-ACC dimensions which were comparable to the EQ-5D-5L dimensions (Gwet's AC2 ranged from 0.52 to 0.77). The ICC for the QOL-ACC (0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.90) was comparable to the EQ-5D-5L (0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.88). The SEM for the QOL-ACC (0.08) was slightly smaller than for the EQ-5D-5L (0.11). The SDC for the QOL-ACC and the EQ-5D-5L for individual subjects were 0.22 and 0.30 respectively. Sensitivity analyses stratified by quality of life and health status confirmed the base case results.

Conclusions: The QOL-ACC demonstrated a good test-retest reliability similar to the EQ-5D-5L, supporting its repeated use in aged care settings. Further studies will provide evidence of responsiveness of the QOL-ACC to aged care-specific interventions in aged care settings.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.80%
发文量
154
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes is an open access, peer-reviewed, journal offering high quality articles, rapid publication and wide diffusion in the public domain. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes considers original manuscripts on the Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) assessment for evaluation of medical and psychosocial interventions. It also considers approaches and studies on psychometric properties of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures, including cultural validation of instruments if they provide information about the impact of interventions. The journal publishes study protocols and reviews summarising the present state of knowledge concerning a particular aspect of HRQOL and patient reported outcome measures. Reviews should generally follow systematic review methodology. Comments on articles and letters to the editor are welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信