Kathleen W Wyrwich1, Vicki M Tardino. 1. Department of Research Methodology, Saint Louis University, 3545 Lafayette Ave., Room 370, Saint Louis, MO 63104-1399, USA. wyrwichk@slu.edu
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Several methods currently used for determining meaningful or important change in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures are anchored by global transition items. It can be empirically demonstrated that patients' responses to these gold standards for change do not adequately incorporate the prior condition, yet these transition items play an influential role in patient-clinician communications and cannot be disregarded. This follow-up study queried patients to better understand how they ascertained their transition assessments. DATA SOURCE: Prior to their qualitative interviews, the 41 participants in this study had completed 1 year of enrollment in a clinical study with bi-monthly HRQoL telephone interviews that included the SF-36 and a disease-specific HRQoL instrument (asthma, COPD, or heart disease), as well as global transition assessments for each instruments domains. STUDY DESIGN: We used face-to-face cognitive interview and the think aloud approaches to obtain qualitative clues for understanding patient reports of HRQoL changes over time. Interview transcripts were coded using the four components of the Rapkin-Schwarz Appraisal Model: frame of reference; sampling strategy; standards of comparison; and combinatory algorithm. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Patients' explanations for determining global transition item responses often focused on current mobility and fatigue patterns, physicians' statements about their conditions, comparisons of their current states with the prior health conditions, and strong personal convictions that reflected a resistance to voicing any emotional changes. Patients also expressed primary health concerns, like back pain, that were not related to the chronic conditions (asthma, COPD or heart disease) under investigation. CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL studies and patient-clinician communications that incorporate global transition assessments to anchor the interpretations of HRQoL changes should also consider additional relevant questions to understand the process patients uses to appraise and report changes in HRQoL.
OBJECTIVE: Several methods currently used for determining meaningful or important change in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures are anchored by global transition items. It can be empirically demonstrated that patients' responses to these gold standards for change do not adequately incorporate the prior condition, yet these transition items play an influential role in patient-clinician communications and cannot be disregarded. This follow-up study queried patients to better understand how they ascertained their transition assessments. DATA SOURCE: Prior to their qualitative interviews, the 41 participants in this study had completed 1 year of enrollment in a clinical study with bi-monthly HRQoL telephone interviews that included the SF-36 and a disease-specific HRQoL instrument (asthma, COPD, or heart disease), as well as global transition assessments for each instruments domains. STUDY DESIGN: We used face-to-face cognitive interview and the think aloud approaches to obtain qualitative clues for understanding patient reports of HRQoL changes over time. Interview transcripts were coded using the four components of the Rapkin-Schwarz Appraisal Model: frame of reference; sampling strategy; standards of comparison; and combinatory algorithm. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Patients' explanations for determining global transition item responses often focused on current mobility and fatigue patterns, physicians' statements about their conditions, comparisons of their current states with the prior health conditions, and strong personal convictions that reflected a resistance to voicing any emotional changes. Patients also expressed primary health concerns, like back pain, that were not related to the chronic conditions (asthma, COPD or heart disease) under investigation. CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL studies and patient-clinician communications that incorporate global transition assessments to anchor the interpretations of HRQoL changes should also consider additional relevant questions to understand the process patients uses to appraise and report changes in HRQoL.
Authors: Fredric D Wolinsky; Kathleen W Wyrwich; Kurt Kroenke; Ajit N Babu; William M Tierney Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Carolyn E Schwartz; Rita Bode; Nicholas Repucci; Janine Becker; Mirjam A G Sprangers; Peter M Fayers Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2006-09-26 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Elsbeth F Bloem; Florence J van Zuuren; Margot A Koeneman; Bruce D Rapkin; Mechteld R M Visser; Caro C E Koning; Mirjam A G Sprangers Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2008-08-14 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Nancy S Redeker; Ruth Anderson; Suzanne Bakken; Elizabeth Corwin; Sharron Docherty; Susan G Dorsey; Margaret Heitkemper; Donna Jo McCloskey; Shirley Moore; Carol Pullen; Bruce Rapkin; Rachel Schiffman; Drenna Waldrop-Valverde; Patricia Grady Journal: J Nurs Scholarsh Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 3.176
Authors: David J Beard; Kristina Harris; Jill Dawson; Helen Doll; David W Murray; Andrew J Carr; Andrew J Price Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2014-10-31 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Kasey R Boehmer; Michael R Gionfriddo; Rene Rodriguez-Gutierrez; Abd Moain Abu Dabrh; Aaron L Leppin; Ian Hargraves; Carl R May; Nathan D Shippee; Ana Castaneda-Guarderas; Claudia Zeballos Palacios; Pavithra Bora; Patricia Erwin; Victor M Montori Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2016-09-01 Impact factor: 2.497