L Goldbeck1, T G Schmitz. 1. Department of Pediatrics, University Clinic Ulm, Germany. lutz.goldbeck@medizin.uni-ulm.de
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare different generic instruments in measuring quality of life and to demonstrate dimensions of quality of life (QL) in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). METHODS: The short-form-36 health survey (SF-36), the quality of life profile for chronic diseases (PLC), and the questions on life satisfaction (FLZ(M)) were simultaneously employed in a cross-sectional study with 70 adolescents and adults with CF. The different concepts of the measures were compared. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), convergent and construct validity (correlation patterns, common factor analysis), and external validity (correlations with symptom and pulmonary function scores, with intensity of therapy; comparisons with healthy peers) of the three instruments were investigated. RESULTS: Similar reliability, but different validity of the questionnaires are demonstrated. Seventy-three percent of the total variance across the three measures could be explained with a seven-factor-solution: (1) physical functioning (19.3% of total variance), (2) mental health (19.3%), (3) social integration (7.5%), (4) role function/pain (7.5%), (5) economic/material living conditions (7.5%), (6) partnership/family (6.7%) and (7) anxiety (5.2%). DISCUSSION: The different validity of the instruments has to be considered in chosing a questionnaire appropriate to the purpose of measuring. Shortcomings of each instrument can be overcome by multimethod designs and by developing disease-specific scales.
OBJECTIVE: To compare different generic instruments in measuring quality of life and to demonstrate dimensions of quality of life (QL) in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). METHODS: The short-form-36 health survey (SF-36), the quality of life profile for chronic diseases (PLC), and the questions on life satisfaction (FLZ(M)) were simultaneously employed in a cross-sectional study with 70 adolescents and adults with CF. The different concepts of the measures were compared. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), convergent and construct validity (correlation patterns, common factor analysis), and external validity (correlations with symptom and pulmonary function scores, with intensity of therapy; comparisons with healthy peers) of the three instruments were investigated. RESULTS: Similar reliability, but different validity of the questionnaires are demonstrated. Seventy-three percent of the total variance across the three measures could be explained with a seven-factor-solution: (1) physical functioning (19.3% of total variance), (2) mental health (19.3%), (3) social integration (7.5%), (4) role function/pain (7.5%), (5) economic/material living conditions (7.5%), (6) partnership/family (6.7%) and (7) anxiety (5.2%). DISCUSSION: The different validity of the instruments has to be considered in chosing a questionnaire appropriate to the purpose of measuring. Shortcomings of each instrument can be overcome by multimethod designs and by developing disease-specific scales.
Authors: D Staab; K Wenninger; N Gebert; K Rupprath; S Bisson; M Trettin; K D Paul; K M Keller; U Wahn Journal: Thorax Date: 1998-09 Impact factor: 9.139
Authors: Richard Klaghofer; Martina Stamm; Claus Buddeberg; Georg Bauer; Oliver Hämmig; Michaela Knecht; Barbara Buddeberg-Fischer Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2010-06-12 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Jenny Sadler Gallagher; Henry A Feldman; Natalie A Stokes; Marc R Laufer; Mark D Hornstein; Catherine M Gordon; Amy D DiVasta Journal: J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol Date: 2016-02-27 Impact factor: 1.814
Authors: Mirella De Civita; Dean Regier; Abul H Alamgir; Aslam H Anis; Mark J Fitzgerald; Carlo A Marra Journal: Pharmacoeconomics Date: 2005 Impact factor: 4.981