A R Meyers1, H Gage, A Hendricks. 1. Department of Economics, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, Surrey, England.
Abstract
CONTEXT: In a climate of growing concern about costs of health care, professional accountability, and the effectiveness and efficiency of treatment, neurologists should understand measures of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and appreciate both their values and their limits. OBJECTIVE: To provide a critical review of current concepts in the measurement of HRQoL, with particular emphasis on those pertaining to neurologic conditions. DESIGN: A selective overview of measurement strategies and specific instruments. SETTING: Clinical and research settings. PARTICIPANTS: Special attention to people with such conditions as multiple sclerosis and Parkinson disease. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The utility and relevance to neurologists of available measures of HRQoL. RESULTS: There are both generic and condition- or disease-specific measures of HRQoL. Though many measures do not elicit response or are even offensive to people with such conditions as multiple sclerosis and Parkinson disease, other measures pertain directly to their circumstances and needs. CONCLUSIONS: Measures of HRQoL are both meaningful and relevant to neurologists. However, they must be refined-enabled-and used in combinations to address the clinical and existential realities of many neurologic conditions. Arch Neurol. 2000;57:1224-1227
CONTEXT: In a climate of growing concern about costs of health care, professional accountability, and the effectiveness and efficiency of treatment, neurologists should understand measures of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and appreciate both their values and their limits. OBJECTIVE: To provide a critical review of current concepts in the measurement of HRQoL, with particular emphasis on those pertaining to neurologic conditions. DESIGN: A selective overview of measurement strategies and specific instruments. SETTING: Clinical and research settings. PARTICIPANTS: Special attention to people with such conditions as multiple sclerosis and Parkinson disease. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The utility and relevance to neurologists of available measures of HRQoL. RESULTS: There are both generic and condition- or disease-specific measures of HRQoL. Though many measures do not elicit response or are even offensive to people with such conditions as multiple sclerosis and Parkinson disease, other measures pertain directly to their circumstances and needs. CONCLUSIONS: Measures of HRQoL are both meaningful and relevant to neurologists. However, they must be refined-enabled-and used in combinations to address the clinical and existential realities of many neurologic conditions. Arch Neurol. 2000;57:1224-1227