Literature DB >> 10344915

A review of quality of life in Alzheimer's disease. Part 1: Issues in assessing disease impact.

M D Walker1, S S Salek, A J Bayer.   

Abstract

There are numerous methods available for assessing patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) or other forms of dementia. Quality-of-life (QOL) assessment is unique among these methods, because the QOL concept itself includes a subjective component that is fundamental to its measurement. It could be argued that measuring quality of life is just as important as measuring disease severity, disease progression, symptom response, cognition, behavioural disturbance and activities of daily living when assessing the impact of disease and intervention in dementia. The subjective nature of quality of life provides healthcare professionals with the opportunity of incorporating the value systems of patients and their carers into their assessments. A systematic review was carried out to include the published data (and some unpublished data) on QOL assessment tools and instruments that claim to measure quality of life in dementia. Literature for this review was identified by a thorough search of computer databases (1980-1997) that included Medline, Embase, PsychLit and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts. Reports concerning the conceptualisation, development, validation, reliability, reproducibility, comprehensiveness, practicality and use of QOL instruments in dementia/AD were selected for review as well as papers documenting clinical drug trials in this therapeutic area. A number of measures or methods used in the literature for assessing the quality of life of patients with dementing illnesses were identified. It was decided to present the resulting review in 2 parts that correspond to the 2 main groups into which the instruments were categorised. The first (part 1) looks at measures used to assess the impact of disease as well as instruments at a developmental or testing stage. The second (part 2) includes instruments that claim to measure quality of life in studies documenting the impact of a drug in this therapeutic area. There are as yet no validated methods of assessing the quality of life of both patients with dementia and their carers at the same time. QOL outcomes for these 2 groups is closely, if not fundamentally, linked and yet most studies identified in this review concentrate on measuring the quality of life of either the patient or the carer alone. Although some researchers may be getting close conceptually, an instrument has yet to satisfy all the criteria necessary to become accepted as a gold standard for QOL assessment in dementing illness. The ideal instrument must show that it can reliably, reproducibly and comprehensively assess quality of life for patients with dementia and their carers. It should also demonstrate that it can measure quality of life effectively using a practical administration technique that does not place any unnecessary burden on either informal carers, other healthcare workers involved or the patient themselves. Further cross-sectional and longitudinal research is required to psychometrically test the available instruments as well as continuing conceptual research to explore new ways of assessing quality of life in this important area.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 10344915     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199814050-00004

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


  77 in total

1.  Objective psychometric tests in clinical trials of dementia drugs. Position paper from the International Working Group on Harmonization of Dementia Drug Guidelines.

Authors:  S H Ferris; U Lucca; R Mohs; B Dubois; K Wesnes; H Erzigkeit; D Geldmacher; N Bodick
Journal:  Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 2.703

2.  Quality-of-life assessment in dementia drug development. Position paper from the International Working Group on Harmonization of Dementia Drug Guidelines.

Authors:  P J Whitehouse; J M Orgogozo; R E Becker; S Gauthier; M Pontecorvo; H Erzigkeit; S Rogers; R C Mohs; N Bodick; G Bruno; P Dal-Bianco
Journal:  Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 2.703

Review 3.  Utility approach to measuring health-related quality of life.

Authors:  G W Torrance
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

4.  The association between quantitative measures of dementia and of senile change in the cerebral grey matter of elderly subjects.

Authors:  G Blessed; B E Tomlinson; M Roth
Journal:  Br J Psychiatry       Date:  1968-07       Impact factor: 9.319

5.  Development of a rating scale for primary depressive illness.

Authors:  M Hamilton
Journal:  Br J Soc Clin Psychol       Date:  1967-12

Review 6.  Methodological issues in measuring the functional status of cognitively impaired nursing home residents: the use of proxies and performance-based measures.

Authors:  S I Zimmerman; J Magaziner
Journal:  Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 2.703

7.  Perceived quality of life and preferences for life-sustaining treatment in older adults.

Authors:  R F Uhlmann; R A Pearlman
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1991-03

Review 8.  Measures of psychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer patients: a review.

Authors:  M F Weiner; E Koss; K V Wild; D G Folks; P Tariot; H Luszczynska; P Whitehouse
Journal:  Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.703

9.  The Global Deterioration Scale for assessment of primary degenerative dementia.

Authors:  B Reisberg; S H Ferris; M J de Leon; T Crook
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  1982-09       Impact factor: 18.112

10.  Dementia and cancer: a comparison of spouse caregivers.

Authors:  E C Clipp; L K George
Journal:  Gerontologist       Date:  1993-08
View more
  11 in total

1.  A review of quality of life in Alzheimer's disease. Parts 1 and 2: Issues in assessing disease impact and drug effects.

Authors:  S P McKenna; L C Doward
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  A review of quality of life in Alzheimer's disease. Parts 1 and 2: Issues in assessing disease impact and drug effects.

Authors:  M Greer; H Monteban
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 3.  Clinical and economic factors in the treatment of behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia.

Authors:  M E Hemels; K L Lanctôt; M Iskedjian; T R Einarson
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 3.923

4.  How are quality of life ratings made? Toward a model of quality of life in people with dementia.

Authors:  L M T Byrne-Davis; P D Bennett; G K Wilcock
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 5.  Evaluation of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of health status measurement instruments.

Authors:  Lidwine B Mokkink; Caroline B Terwee; Paul W Stratford; Jordi Alonso; Donald L Patrick; Ingrid Riphagen; Dirk L Knol; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-02-24       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 6.  Health-related quality-of-life measurement in hypertension. A review of randomised controlled drug trials.

Authors:  I Côté; J P Grégoire; J Moisan
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 7.  A review of quality of life in Alzheimer's disease. Part 2: Issues in assessing drug effects.

Authors:  S S Salek; M D Walker; A J Bayer
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 8.  Pharmacoeconomics of cholinesterase inhibitors in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Linus Jönsson
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Validation of the Thai QOL-AD version in Alzheimer's patients and caregivers.

Authors:  Nopporn Buasi; Unchalee Permsuwan
Journal:  Australas Med J       Date:  2014-06-30

Review 10.  Cost effectiveness of cholinesterase inhibitors in the treatment of Alzheimer's disease: a review with methodological considerations.

Authors:  Anders Wimo
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 3.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.