BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) participation in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) holds a number of benefits for quality of life (QOL) but there is a need to better understand conceptual and measurement issues. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the appropriateness of outcome measurement tools to assess QOL in relation to PA in persons with SCI. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed and CINAHL databases to identify studies that used a QOL measurement tool and assessed PA or employed a PA intervention to determine a relationship between PA and QOL. RESULTS: Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Within the 13 articles, 9 different QOL outcome measurement tools were used; two objective measures (Short Form-36 [SF-36] and Quality of Well-being [QWB]) and 7 subjective measures (Perceived QOL [PQoL], Satisfaction with Life Scale [SWLS], QOL Index SCI Version III, Life Satisfaction [LISAT], QOL Feedback, QOL Profile: Physical and Sensory Disabilities Version [QOLP-PSD] and Subjective QOL [SQOL]). The PQoL was the most commonly used tool (4 studies) and was used in 2 of the 3 randomized controlled trials. Twelve of the studies demonstrated a positive effect of PA on QOL. CONCLUSIONS: Outcome measurement tool selection should be guided by the specific purpose of the data collection activity as well as the context under which the tool will be used (e.g., setting, population, etc.). Therefore, different tools may rightfully be selected to assess the same construct when considering different circumstances-however, these considerations should be balanced by the evidence and demonstrated prior utility of potential tools.
BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) participation in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) holds a number of benefits for quality of life (QOL) but there is a need to better understand conceptual and measurement issues. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the appropriateness of outcome measurement tools to assess QOL in relation to PA in persons with SCI. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted using PubMed and CINAHL databases to identify studies that used a QOL measurement tool and assessed PA or employed a PA intervention to determine a relationship between PA and QOL. RESULTS: Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Within the 13 articles, 9 different QOL outcome measurement tools were used; two objective measures (Short Form-36 [SF-36] and Quality of Well-being [QWB]) and 7 subjective measures (Perceived QOL [PQoL], Satisfaction with Life Scale [SWLS], QOL Index SCI Version III, Life Satisfaction [LISAT], QOL Feedback, QOL Profile: Physical and Sensory Disabilities Version [QOLP-PSD] and Subjective QOL [SQOL]). The PQoL was the most commonly used tool (4 studies) and was used in 2 of the 3 randomized controlled trials. Twelve of the studies demonstrated a positive effect of PA on QOL. CONCLUSIONS: Outcome measurement tool selection should be guided by the specific purpose of the data collection activity as well as the context under which the tool will be used (e.g., setting, population, etc.). Therefore, different tools may rightfully be selected to assess the same construct when considering different circumstances-however, these considerations should be balanced by the evidence and demonstrated prior utility of potential tools.
Authors: Alina Ionela Palimaru; William E Cunningham; Marcus Dillistone; Arturo Vargas-Bustamante; Honghu Liu; Ron D Hays Journal: J Spinal Cord Med Date: 2018-05-23 Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Eric Garshick; Sara Mulroy; Daniel E Graves; Karen Greenwald; John A Horton; Leslie R Morse Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2016-03-04 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Lynn A Worobey; Allen W Heinemann; Kim D Anderson; Denise Fyffe; Trevor A Dyson-Hudson; Theresa Berner; Michael L Boninger Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2021-04-09 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Ewa Szeliga; Agnieszka Brzozowska-Magoń; Renata Borys; Andżelina Wolan-Nieroda; Katarzyna Walicka-Cupryś Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-02-04 Impact factor: 3.390