Eileen Danaher Hacker1. 1. College of Nursing, University of Illinois, Chicago, USA. ehacker@uic.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE/ OBJECTIVES: To critically evaluate a decade of quantitative quality-of-life (QOL) measurement in adult patients undergoing bone marrow transplant (BMT) or peripheral blood stem cell transplant (PBSCT). DATA SOURCES: Quantitative research articles published between January 1990 and January 2000 in the nursing and medical literature. DATA SYNTHESIS: QOL measures reported in BMT and PBSCT literature support the multidimensional nature of the construct. The majority of studies used a single instrument to assess QOL. Variations in measurement included use of a single versus multiple instruments to assess QOL, theoretical underpinnings of instruments, and output (overall score, domain scores) provided by the instruments. CONCLUSIONS: A study's purpose, conceptual approach, patient burden, and resources available to the researcher should guide decisions regarding QOL instrumentation. No gold standard exists for assessing QOL in research or clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurses can select from a variety of tools to measure QOL in the BMT and PBSCT patient populations. Clinicians must consider the clinical meaningfulness of changes in QOL before implementing changes in their practice.
PURPOSE/ OBJECTIVES: To critically evaluate a decade of quantitative quality-of-life (QOL) measurement in adult patients undergoing bone marrow transplant (BMT) or peripheral blood stem cell transplant (PBSCT). DATA SOURCES: Quantitative research articles published between January 1990 and January 2000 in the nursing and medical literature. DATA SYNTHESIS: QOL measures reported in BMT and PBSCT literature support the multidimensional nature of the construct. The majority of studies used a single instrument to assess QOL. Variations in measurement included use of a single versus multiple instruments to assess QOL, theoretical underpinnings of instruments, and output (overall score, domain scores) provided by the instruments. CONCLUSIONS: A study's purpose, conceptual approach, patient burden, and resources available to the researcher should guide decisions regarding QOL instrumentation. No gold standard exists for assessing QOL in research or clinical practice. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurses can select from a variety of tools to measure QOL in the BMT and PBSCT patient populations. Clinicians must consider the clinical meaningfulness of changes in QOL before implementing changes in their practice.
Authors: Marlene Z Cohen; Cathy L Rozmus; Tito R Mendoza; Nikhil S Padhye; Joyce Neumann; Ibrahima Gning; Ana Aleman; Sergio Giralt; Charles S Cleeland Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Chelsea G Ratcliff; Sarah Prinsloo; Michael Richardson; Laura Baynham-Fletcher; Richard Lee; Alejandro Chaoul; Marlene Z Cohen; Marcos de Lima; Lorenzo Cohen Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2014-01-09 Impact factor: 2.629