Suppr超能文献

老年人特定健康状况与生活质量:自我评估工具的结构化综述

Older people specific health status and quality of life: a structured review of self-assessed instruments.

作者信息

Haywood Kirstie L, Garratt Andrew M, Fitzpatrick Raymond

机构信息

Research Officer, National Centre for Health Outcomes Development, Unit of Health-Care Epidemiology, Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK.

出版信息

J Eval Clin Pract. 2005 Aug;11(4):315-27. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2005.00538.x.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To review evidence relating to the measurement properties of older people specific self-assessed, multi-dimensional measures of health status.

DESIGN

Systematic literature searches to identify instruments. Pre-defined criteria relating to reliability, validity, responsiveness, precision and acceptability.

RESULTS

A total of 46 articles relating to 18 instruments met the inclusion criteria. Most evidence was found for the OARS Multidimensional Functional Assessment Questionnaire (OMFAQ), CARE, Functional Assessment Inventory (FAI) and Quality of Life Profile--Seniors Version (QOLPSV). Most instruments have been evaluated in single studies. Four instruments have evidence of internal consistency and test-retest reliability--LEIPAD, Philadelphia Geriatrics Centre Multilevel Assessment Inventory, Perceived Well-being Scale, Wellness Index (WI). Two instruments lack evidence of reliability--Brief Screening Questionnaire, Geriatric Quality of Life Questionnaire (GQLQ). Older people contributed to the content of the GQLQ, QOLPSV and WI. Most instruments were assessed for validity through comparisons with other instruments, global judgements of health, or clinical and socio-demographic variables. Limited evidence of responsiveness was found for five instruments--GQLQ, OMFAQ, PGCMAI, QOLPSV, Self-Evaluation of Life Scale (SELF).

CONCLUSION

Although most evidence was found for the OMFAQ this was largely for the ADL domain; evidence for reliability and responsiveness is limited. Limited evidence of reliability, validity and responsiveness was found for the PGCMAI, QOLPSV and SELF. The lack of evidence for measurement properties restricts instrument recommendation. Instrument content should be assessed for relevance before application and the concurrent evaluation of specific and widely used generic instruments is recommended. Several instruments, including the BSQ and EASY-Care, were developed recently and further evidence of instrument performance is required.

摘要

目的

回顾与老年人特定的自我评估多维健康状况测量工具的测量属性相关的证据。

设计

通过系统的文献检索来识别工具。采用与信度、效度、反应度、精度和可接受性相关的预定义标准。

结果

共有46篇与18种工具相关的文章符合纳入标准。关于OARS多维功能评估问卷(OMFAQ)、CARE、功能评估量表(FAI)和生活质量概况——老年人版(QOLPSV)的证据最多。大多数工具仅在单一研究中得到评估。有4种工具具有内部一致性和重测信度的证据——老年人综合照护评估量表(LEIPAD)、费城老年医学中心多级评估量表、幸福感量表、健康指数(WI)。有2种工具缺乏信度证据——简易筛查问卷、老年生活质量问卷(GQLQ)。老年人参与了GQLQ、QOLPSV和WI的内容制定。大多数工具通过与其他工具比较、对健康的整体判断或临床及社会人口学变量来评估效度。发现有5种工具具有有限的反应度证据——GQLQ、OMFAQ、费城老年医学中心多级评估量表(PGCMAI)、QOLPSV、生活自我评估量表(SELF)。

结论

尽管关于OMFAQ的证据最多,但主要是在日常生活活动领域;信度和反应度的证据有限。关于PGCMAI、QOLPSV和SELF的信度、效度和反应度的证据有限。测量属性缺乏证据限制了工具的推荐。在应用前应评估工具内容的相关性,建议同时评估特定的和广泛使用的通用工具。包括简易筛查问卷(BSQ)和简易照护(EASY-Care)在内的几种工具是最近开发的,需要进一步的工具性能证据。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验