INTRODUCTION: To provide optimal care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease physicians need to understand if their patients benefit from an intervention. The objective of this study was to assess agreement between patients and physicians on health-related quality of life (HRQL) changes in response to respiratory rehabilitation and to explore sources for disagreement. METHODS: Sixty-one patients rated their health states on a validated preference-based instrument, the feeling thermometer (FT). In an analogous manner, the eight treating physicians rated the patients' health states on the FT. Patients and physicians were blinded to each other's ratings. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to assess agreement between patients and physicians and used HRQL instruments and the 6-min walking test to assess the evaluative properties of the FT. RESULTS: We found moderate agreement at baseline (ICC 0.40, P = 0.018) and follow-up (ICC 0.49, P = 0.008) but large disagreement about change scores (ICC 0.02, P = 0.46). Patients' FTchange scores correlated well with change scores of the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire, SF-36 and the Borg scale for dyspnoea whereas physicians' FT change scores correlated significantly with the change score of the 6- min walking test (r = 0.33). Physicians' ratings showed an inconsistent pattern for correlations with HRQL measures. CONCLUSIONS: There is large disagreement between patients and physicians on HRQL changes in response to respiratory rehabilitation. Investigators should assess whether the introduction of HRQL instruments into clinical practice raises the awareness of physicians towards HRQL and improves agreement with their patients.
INTRODUCTION: To provide optimal care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease physicians need to understand if their patients benefit from an intervention. The objective of this study was to assess agreement between patients and physicians on health-related quality of life (HRQL) changes in response to respiratory rehabilitation and to explore sources for disagreement. METHODS: Sixty-one patients rated their health states on a validated preference-based instrument, the feeling thermometer (FT). In an analogous manner, the eight treating physicians rated the patients' health states on the FT. Patients and physicians were blinded to each other's ratings. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to assess agreement between patients and physicians and used HRQL instruments and the 6-min walking test to assess the evaluative properties of the FT. RESULTS: We found moderate agreement at baseline (ICC 0.40, P = 0.018) and follow-up (ICC 0.49, P = 0.008) but large disagreement about change scores (ICC 0.02, P = 0.46). Patients' FTchange scores correlated well with change scores of the Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire, SF-36 and the Borg scale for dyspnoea whereas physicians' FT change scores correlated significantly with the change score of the 6- min walking test (r = 0.33). Physicians' ratings showed an inconsistent pattern for correlations with HRQL measures. CONCLUSIONS: There is large disagreement between patients and physicians on HRQL changes in response to respiratory rehabilitation. Investigators should assess whether the introduction of HRQL instruments into clinical practice raises the awareness of physicians towards HRQL and improves agreement with their patients.
Authors: Christopher G Slatore; Laura M Cecere; Lynn F Reinke; Linda Ganzini; Edmunds M Udris; Brianna R Moss; Chris L Bryson; J Randall Curtis; David H Au Journal: Chest Date: 2010-03-18 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Wojtek Wiercioch; Robby Nieuwlaat; Elie A Akl; Robert Kunkle; Kendall E Alexander; Adam Cuker; Anita Rajasekhar; Pablo Alonso-Coello; David R Anderson; Shannon M Bates; Mary Cushman; Philipp Dahm; Gordon Guyatt; Alfonso Iorio; Wendy Lim; Gary H Lyman; Saskia Middeldorp; Paul Monagle; Reem A Mustafa; Ignacio Neumann; Thomas L Ortel; Bram Rochwerg; Nancy Santesso; Sara K Vesely; Daniel M Witt; Holger J Schünemann Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2020-05-26
Authors: H A Hutchings; P Upton; W-Y Cheung; A Maddocks; C Eiser; J G Williams; I T Russell; S Jackson; M E M Jenney Journal: Arch Dis Child Date: 2007-05-23 Impact factor: 3.791
Authors: Lara Siebeling; Gerben ter Riet; Willem M van der Wal; Ronald B Geskus; Marco Zoller; Patrick Muggensturm; Irena Joleska; Milo A Puhan Journal: BMC Pulm Med Date: 2009-05-06 Impact factor: 3.317
Authors: Hyeon Jin Park; Hyung Kook Yang; Dong Wook Shin; Yoon Yi Kim; Young Ae Kim; Young Ho Yun; Byung Ho Nam; Smita Bhatia; Byung Kiu Park; Thad T Ghim; Hyoung Jin Kang; Kyung Duk Park; Hee Young Shin; Hyo Seop Ahn Journal: J Korean Med Sci Date: 2013-11-26 Impact factor: 2.153