Hiroko Kamitani1, Hiroyuki Umegaki1, Kazushi Okamoto2, Shigeru Kanda3, Atsushi Asai4, Keiko Maeda5, Hideki Nomura6, Takuya Shimojima7, Yusuke Suzuki8, Hiroko Ohshima9, Masafumi Kuzuya1. 1. Department of Community Healthcare and Geriatrics, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan. 2. Department of Public Health, Aichi Prefectural College of Nursing and Health, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan. 3. Minami Health-Medical Cooperative Kaname Hospital, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan. 4. Sanei Clinic, Komaki, Aichi, Japan. 5. Mokuren Clinic, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan. 6. Aichi Shinryoujyo Nonami, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan. 7. Kachigawa Family Clinic, Kasugai, Japan. 8. Department of Comprehensive Community Care Systems, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Aichi, Japan. 9. Center for Gerontology and Social Science, Section for Nursing and Care, National Center for Geriatrics and Gerontology, Morioka, Aichi, Japan.
Abstract
AIM: To develop and validate a scale that assesses quality of life in patients receiving home-based medical care. METHODS: A new quality of life scale was developed and evaluated in four phases: (i) item generation; (ii) first field study with a 14-item questionnaire; (iii) preliminary validation study, to reduce the number of items to four; and (iv) second field study comprising 40 patients, to evaluate the validity of the final version. Participants were requested to answer both the final version of the scale and the Short Form-8, to enable identification of any relationship between the two. RESULTS: Items were generated after discussions with doctors and care managers, and 14 items were selected for the draft version. In the preliminary validation study, 10 items were deleted, based on the results of statistical analysis of the data from the first field study. A psychometric analysis showed that the final four-item questionnaire had internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.7), and a significant association with the Short Form-8. CONCLUSIONS: We created the first quality of life scale for patients receiving home-based medical care. The scale's internal consistency was confirmed, as well as its external validity. This scale can be used independently of factors such as a patient's age, sex, level of independence in the presence of dementia or disability, swallowing function, hearing ability and communication ability, and can be used with ease in routine clinical practice. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2017; 17: 440-448.
AIM: To develop and validate a scale that assesses quality of life in patients receiving home-based medical care. METHODS: A new quality of life scale was developed and evaluated in four phases: (i) item generation; (ii) first field study with a 14-item questionnaire; (iii) preliminary validation study, to reduce the number of items to four; and (iv) second field study comprising 40 patients, to evaluate the validity of the final version. Participants were requested to answer both the final version of the scale and the Short Form-8, to enable identification of any relationship between the two. RESULTS: Items were generated after discussions with doctors and care managers, and 14 items were selected for the draft version. In the preliminary validation study, 10 items were deleted, based on the results of statistical analysis of the data from the first field study. A psychometric analysis showed that the final four-item questionnaire had internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.7), and a significant association with the Short Form-8. CONCLUSIONS: We created the first quality of life scale for patients receiving home-based medical care. The scale's internal consistency was confirmed, as well as its external validity. This scale can be used independently of factors such as a patient's age, sex, level of independence in the presence of dementia or disability, swallowing function, hearing ability and communication ability, and can be used with ease in routine clinical practice. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2017; 17: 440-448.
Authors: Fiona Höbler; Katherine S McGilton; Walter Wittich; Kate Dupuis; Marilyn Reed; Shirley Dumassais; Paul Mick; M Kathleen Pichora-Fuller Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2021 Impact factor: 4.472