Literature DB >> 10146979

Assessing the responsiveness of a quality-of-life instrument and the measurement of symptom severity in essential hypertension.

M C Reilly1, A S Zbrozek.   

Abstract

A pilot study was conducted to compare symptoms elicited with an open-ended question versus a checklist and to measure the responsiveness of quality-of-life measures to symptom severity. The pilot study was part of a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of clentiazem, a calcium channel blocker, in the treatment of essential hypertension. Symptom and quality-of-life data were obtained from 88 patients at baseline and after 10 weeks of therapy by a trained telephone interviewer. Comparison of the symptom checklist and open-ended question method suggests that both methods are necessary to capture severe symptomatology. The 24-item checklist failed to elicit approximately 50% of the severe symptoms reported on the open question list. On the other hand, only 18% of the most severe symptoms subsequently reported on the checklist were first reported by the open question method. The responsiveness of quality-of-life measures to symptom severity was tested using a 20% change in symptom severity obtained from the checklist as the minimal clinically significant difference. Using Guyatt's formula, a minimum sample size of approximately 428 (alpha = 0.05, beta = 0.10) patients per treatment group is required to detect differences in measures of general health perception, anxiety, depression and limitations in social activities. A larger sample is required to show differences in leisure activities. Differences in limitations of the capability to perform house or yard work might be demonstrable with as few as 17 patients per group. This pilot study demonstrated that the severity of symptoms associated with hypertension, and the side effects of its treatment with drugs, are adequately captured by a symptom checklist preceded by an open-ended method of questioning. Responsiveness testing estimated the sample size required to show a statistically significant difference, assuming a 20% change in symptom severity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1992        PMID: 10146979     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199202010-00007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  20 in total

1.  Antihypertensive therapy and quality of life: a comparison of atenolol, captopril, enalapril and propranolol.

Authors:  S S Steiner; A J Friedhoff; B L Wilson; J R Wecker; J P Santo
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 3.012

2.  Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments.

Authors:  G Guyatt; S Walter; G Norman
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

3.  The MOS short-form general health survey. Reliability and validity in a patient population.

Authors:  A L Stewart; R D Hays; J E Ware
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  Quality of life among hypertensive patients with a diuretic background who are taking atenolol and enalapril.

Authors:  J A Blumenthal; L G Ekelund; C F Emery
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 6.875

5.  Event recording in a clinical trial of a new medicine.

Authors:  R J Simpson; B Tiplady; D C Skegg
Journal:  Br Med J       Date:  1980-05-03

6.  Detection of adverse drug reactions in a clinical trial using two types of questioning.

Authors:  J Wallin; J Sjövall
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 3.393

7.  Effect of antihypertensives on sexual function and quality of life: the TAIM Study.

Authors:  S Wassertheil-Smoller; M D Blaufox; A Oberman; B R Davis; C Swencionis; M O Knerr; C M Hawkins; H G Langford
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1991-04-15       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Gastrointestinal side effects and quality of life in patients receiving radiation therapy.

Authors:  G V Padilla
Journal:  Nutrition       Date:  1990 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 4.008

9.  The effects of antihypertensive therapy on the quality of life.

Authors:  S H Croog; S Levine; M A Testa; B Brown; C J Bulpitt; C D Jenkins; G L Klerman; G H Williams
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1986-06-26       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Patients as a direct source of information on adverse drug reactions.

Authors:  A S Mitchell; D A Henry; R Sanson-Fisher; D L O'Connell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1988-10-08
View more
  3 in total

1.  On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation.

Authors:  C B Terwee; F W Dekker; W M Wiersinga; M F Prummel; P M M Bossuyt
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  The mathematical relationship among different forms of responsiveness coefficients.

Authors:  G R Norman; Kathleen W Wyrwich; Donald L Patrick
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-03-10       Impact factor: 3.440

Review 3.  Eliciting adverse effects data from participants in clinical trials.

Authors:  Elizabeth N Allen; Clare Ir Chandler; Nyaradzo Mandimika; Cordelia Leisegang; Karen Barnes
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-01-16
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.