BACKGROUND: Accountability of health services in meeting needs and assessing outcomes is hampered by the absence of tools to assess health, especially in children and youth. Because it is no longer adequate to assess health by a narrow focus on biological and physiological measures, instruments that assess functional status, person-focused general health status, and overall well-being in a more comprehensive way are needed. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether a health status instrument we have developed discriminates between teenagers in schools and teenagers attending clinics for acute or chronic conditions. METHODS: Teenagers (aged 11-17 years) in schools and in general medical and specialty clinics completed a questionnaire The Child Health and Illness Profile-Adolescent Edition (CHIP-AE), comprehensively covering aspects of health in 6 domains: discomfort, satisfaction with health, disorders, achievement of social expectations, risks, and resilience. RESULTS: Acutely ill teenagers reported more physical discomfort, minor illnesses, and lower physical fitness; chronically ill teenagers reported more limitations of activity, long-term medical disorders, dissatisfaction with their health, and less physical fitness than teenagers in the school samples. Age, sex, and social class did not explain the differences. Teenagers within the acutely and chronically ill clinic populations differed substantially in their health status. IMPLICATIONS: Availability of a comprehensive instrument (CHIP-AE) to assess adolescent health provides a means of documenting health needs and outcomes in populations of teenagers with acute or chronic illness. The heterogeneity within these groups provides support for a person-focused (rather than a disease-focused) approach to assessing both needs for care and the influence of care on promoting health.
BACKGROUND: Accountability of health services in meeting needs and assessing outcomes is hampered by the absence of tools to assess health, especially in children and youth. Because it is no longer adequate to assess health by a narrow focus on biological and physiological measures, instruments that assess functional status, person-focused general health status, and overall well-being in a more comprehensive way are needed. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether a health status instrument we have developed discriminates between teenagers in schools and teenagers attending clinics for acute or chronic conditions. METHODS: Teenagers (aged 11-17 years) in schools and in general medical and specialty clinics completed a questionnaire The Child Health and Illness Profile-Adolescent Edition (CHIP-AE), comprehensively covering aspects of health in 6 domains: discomfort, satisfaction with health, disorders, achievement of social expectations, risks, and resilience. RESULTS: Acutely ill teenagers reported more physical discomfort, minor illnesses, and lower physical fitness; chronically ill teenagers reported more limitations of activity, long-term medical disorders, dissatisfaction with their health, and less physical fitness than teenagers in the school samples. Age, sex, and social class did not explain the differences. Teenagers within the acutely and chronically ill clinic populations differed substantially in their health status. IMPLICATIONS: Availability of a comprehensive instrument (CHIP-AE) to assess adolescent health provides a means of documenting health needs and outcomes in populations of teenagers with acute or chronic illness. The heterogeneity within these groups provides support for a person-focused (rather than a disease-focused) approach to assessing both needs for care and the influence of care on promoting health.
Authors: Maureen Hack; Mark Schluchter; Christopher B Forrest; H Gerry Taylor; Dennis Drotar; Grayson Holmbeck; Eric Youngstrom; Seunghee Margevicius; Laura Andreias Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2012-06-04 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Anne W Riley; Georg Spiel; David Coghill; Manfred Döpfner; Bruno Falissard; Maria J Lorenzo; Ulrich Preuss; Stephen J Ralston Journal: Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 4.785
Authors: Katie A Devine; Ann C Mertens; John A Whitton; Carmen L Wilson; Kirsten K Ness; Jordan Gilleland Marchak; Wendy Leisenring; Kevin C Oeffinger; Leslie L Robison; Gregory T Armstrong; Kevin R Krull Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Lisa S Kahalley; Leslie A Robinson; Vida L Tyc; Melissa M Hudson; Wendy Leisenring; Kayla Stratton; Ann C Mertens; Lonnie Zeltzer; Leslie L Robison; Pamela S Hinds Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2011-05-25 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: James L Klosky; Rebecca H Foster; Zhenghong Li; Courtney Peasant; Carrie R Howell; Ann C Mertens; Leslie L Robison; Kirsten K Ness Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2013-12-23 Impact factor: 4.267