Vinciya Pandian1, Carol B Thompson, David J Feller-Kopman, Marek A Mirski. 1. 1Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD. 2Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD. 3Department of Biostatistics, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD. 4Department of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a new instrument for measuring health-related quality of life in mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU. DESIGN: Expert panel consensus and a prospective longitudinal survey. SETTING: Urban, academic, tertiary care medical center. PATIENTS: One hundred fifteen awake, mechanically ventilated, ICU patients who either received a tracheostomy or remained endotracheally intubated. INTERVENTIONS: A new quality-of-life instrument was developed and validated by using pilot study data; informal interviews of patients, families, and nurses; expert panel consensus; and item analyses. The new instrument was used to measure quality of life at three time points (5 d, 10 d, and 15 d after intubation). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A new 12-item quality-of-life questionnaire for mechanically ventilated patients was developed. Patients' responses to the quality-of-life questionnaire revealed moderate-to-high correlations with EuroQol scores (r = -0.4 to -0.9) and the EuroQol Visual Analog Scale (r = 0.6-0.9) across the three times and a moderate correlation with the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment tool (r = 0.5) at 10 days after intubation. Cronbach α ranged from 0.80 to 0.94 across the three times. The quality-of-life questionnaire for mechanically ventilated patients was responsive to changes in treatment modalities (tracheostomy vs no tracheostomy and early vs late tracheostomy demarcated by 10 d of intubation). Exploratory factor analysis revealed that this instrument was unidimensional in nature. CONCLUSIONS: The new quality-of-life questionnaire for mechanically ventilated patients is valid and can reliably measure quality of life in mechanically ventilated ICU patients. It may provide clinicians with an accurate assessment of patients' quality of life and facilitate optimal decision making regarding patients' ICU plan of care.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate a new instrument for measuring health-related quality of life in mechanically ventilated patients in the ICU. DESIGN: Expert panel consensus and a prospective longitudinal survey. SETTING: Urban, academic, tertiary care medical center. PATIENTS: One hundred fifteen awake, mechanically ventilated, ICU patients who either received a tracheostomy or remained endotracheally intubated. INTERVENTIONS: A new quality-of-life instrument was developed and validated by using pilot study data; informal interviews of patients, families, and nurses; expert panel consensus; and item analyses. The new instrument was used to measure quality of life at three time points (5 d, 10 d, and 15 d after intubation). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A new 12-item quality-of-life questionnaire for mechanically ventilated patients was developed. Patients' responses to the quality-of-life questionnaire revealed moderate-to-high correlations with EuroQol scores (r = -0.4 to -0.9) and the EuroQol Visual Analog Scale (r = 0.6-0.9) across the three times and a moderate correlation with the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment tool (r = 0.5) at 10 days after intubation. Cronbach α ranged from 0.80 to 0.94 across the three times. The quality-of-life questionnaire for mechanically ventilated patients was responsive to changes in treatment modalities (tracheostomy vs no tracheostomy and early vs late tracheostomy demarcated by 10 d of intubation). Exploratory factor analysis revealed that this instrument was unidimensional in nature. CONCLUSIONS: The new quality-of-life questionnaire for mechanically ventilated patients is valid and can reliably measure quality of life in mechanically ventilated ICU patients. It may provide clinicians with an accurate assessment of patients' quality of life and facilitate optimal decision making regarding patients' ICU plan of care.
Authors: E W Ely; R Margolin; J Francis; L May; B Truman; R Dittus; T Speroff; S Gautam; G R Bernard; S K Inouye Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: J E Nelson; D E Meier; E J Oei; D M Nierman; R S Senzel; P L Manfredi; S M Davis; R S Morrison Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: E W Ely; S K Inouye; G R Bernard; S Gordon; J Francis; L May; B Truman; T Speroff; S Gautam; R Margolin; R P Hart; R Dittus Journal: JAMA Date: 2001-12-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: David K Warren; Sunita J Shukla; Margaret A Olsen; Marin H Kollef; Christopher S Hollenbeak; Michael J Cox; Max M Cohen; Victoria J Fraser Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Vinciya Pandian; Sonali Bose; Christina Miller; Adam Schiavi; David Feller-Kopman; Nasir Bhatti; Marek Mirski Journal: ORL Head Neck Nurs Date: 2014
Authors: Simon N Rogers; Suzanne Gwanne; Derek Lowe; Gerry Humphris; Beven Yueh; Ernest A Weymuller Journal: Head Neck Date: 2002-06 Impact factor: 3.147