BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Generic utility health-related quality of life instruments are useful in assessing stroke outcome because they facilitate a broader description of the disease and outcomes, allow comparisons between diseases, and can be used in cost-benefit analysis. The aim of this study was to validate the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument in a stroke population. METHODS: Ninety-three patients recruited from the community-based North East Melbourne Stroke Incidence Study between July 13, 1996, and April 30, 1997, were interviewed 3 months after stroke. Validity of the AQoL was assessed by examining associations between the AQoL and comparator instruments: the Medical Outcomes Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36); London Handicap Scale; Barthel Index; National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; and Irritability, Depression, Anxiety scale. Sensitivity of the AQoL was assessed by comparing AQoL scores from groups of patients categorized by severity of impairment and disability and with total anterior circulation syndrome (TACS) versus non-TACS. Predictive validity was assessed by examining the association between 3-month AQoL scores and outcomes of death or institutionalization 12 months after stroke. RESULTS: Overall AQoL utility scores and individual dimension scores were most highly correlated with relevant scales on the comparator instruments. AQoL scores clearly differentiated between patients in categories of severity of impairment and disability and between patients with TACS and non-TACS. AQoL scores at 3 months after stroke predicted death and institutionalization at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The AQoL demonstrated strong psychometric properties and appears to be a valid and sensitive measure of health-related QoL after stroke.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Generic utility health-related quality of life instruments are useful in assessing stroke outcome because they facilitate a broader description of the disease and outcomes, allow comparisons between diseases, and can be used in cost-benefit analysis. The aim of this study was to validate the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) instrument in a stroke population. METHODS: Ninety-three patients recruited from the community-based North East Melbourne Stroke Incidence Study between July 13, 1996, and April 30, 1997, were interviewed 3 months after stroke. Validity of the AQoL was assessed by examining associations between the AQoL and comparator instruments: the Medical Outcomes Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36); London Handicap Scale; Barthel Index; National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale; and Irritability, Depression, Anxiety scale. Sensitivity of the AQoL was assessed by comparing AQoL scores from groups of patients categorized by severity of impairment and disability and with total anterior circulation syndrome (TACS) versus non-TACS. Predictive validity was assessed by examining the association between 3-month AQoL scores and outcomes of death or institutionalization 12 months after stroke. RESULTS: Overall AQoL utility scores and individual dimension scores were most highly correlated with relevant scales on the comparator instruments. AQoL scores clearly differentiated between patients in categories of severity of impairment and disability and between patients with TACS and non-TACS. AQoL scores at 3 months after stroke predicted death and institutionalization at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The AQoL demonstrated strong psychometric properties and appears to be a valid and sensitive measure of health-related QoL after stroke.
Authors: Shannon Pike; Anne Cusick; Kylie Wales; Lisa Cameron; Lynne Turner-Stokes; Stephen Ashford; Natasha A Lannin Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-02-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Dominique A Cadilhac; Helen M Dewey; Theo Vos; Rob Carter; Amanda G Thrift Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Zhomart Orman; Amanda G Thrift; Muideen T Olaiya; David Ung; Dominique A Cadilhac; Thanh Phan; Mark R Nelson; Velandai K Srikanth; Jason Vuong; Christopher F Bladin; Richard P Gerraty; Sharyn M Fitzgerald; Judith Frayne; Joosup Kim Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2022-01-24 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Lan Gao; Marj Moodie; Ben Freedman; Christina Lam; Hans Tu; Corey Swift; Sze-Ho Ma; Vincent C T Mok; Yi Sui; David Sharpe; Darshan Ghia; Jim Jannes; Stephen Davis; Xinfeng Liu; Bernard Yan Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2022-04-12 Impact factor: 6.106
Authors: Dylan R Morris; Margaret A Cunningham; Anna A Ahimastos; Bronwyn A Kingwell; Elise Pappas; Michael Bourke; Christopher M Reid; Theo Stijnen; Ronald L Dalman; Oliver O Aalami; Jan H Lindeman; Paul E Norman; Philip J Walker; Robert Fitridge; Bernie Bourke; Anthony E Dear; Jenna Pinchbeck; Rene Jaeggi; Jonathan Golledge Journal: Trials Date: 2015-06-17 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Kathryn Whitfield; Rachelle Buchbinder; Leonie Segal; Richard H Osborne Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2006-03-23 Impact factor: 3.186