Westerman Marjan J, Hak Tony, Sprangers Mirjam A G, Groen Harry J M, van der Wal Gerrit, The Anne-Mei
Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO Institute, VU University Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Qual Life Res. 2008 May;17(4):549-58. doi: 10.1007/s11136-008-9333-6.
Quality of life (QoL) is considered to be an indispensable outcome measure of curative and palliative treatment. However, QoL research often yields findings that raise questions about what QoL measurement instruments actually assess and how the scores should be interpreted.
To investigate how patients interpret and respond to questions on the EORTC-QLQ-C30 over time and to find explanations to account for counterintuitive findings in QoL measurement.
Qualitative investigation was made of the response behaviour of small-cell lung cancer patients (n = 23) in the measurement of QoL with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30). Focus was on physical functioning (PF, items 1 to 5), role functioning (RF, items 6 and 7), global health and QoL rating (GH/QOL, items 29 and 30). Interviews were held at four points: at the start of the chemotherapy, 4 weeks later, at the end, and 6 weeks after the end of chemotherapy. Patients were asked to 'think aloud' when filling in the questionnaire.
Patients used various response strategies when answering questions about problems and limitations in functioning, which impacted the accuracy of the scale. Patients had scores suggesting they were less limited than they actually were by taking the wording of questions literally, by guessing their functioning in activities that they did not perform, and by ignoring or excluding certain activities that they could not perform.
Terminally ill patients evaluate their functioning in terms of what they perceive to be normal under the circumstances. Their answers can be interpreted in terms of change in the appraisal process (Rapkin and Schwartz 2004; Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 2, 14). More care should be taken in assessing the quality of a set of questions about physical and role functioning.
生活质量(QoL)被认为是治愈性和姑息性治疗不可或缺的疗效指标。然而,QoL研究常常得出一些结果,引发了关于QoL测量工具实际评估的内容以及分数应如何解读的问题。
调查患者如何随着时间推移解读和回答欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织核心生活质量问卷(EORTC-QLQ-C30)中的问题,并找出QoL测量中出现违反直觉结果的原因。
对23名小细胞肺癌患者使用欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生活质量核心问卷(EORTC QLQ-C30)进行QoL测量时的反应行为进行了定性研究。重点关注身体功能(PF,第1至5项)、角色功能(RF,第6和7项)、总体健康和生活质量评分(GH/QOL,第29和30项)。在四个时间点进行访谈:化疗开始时、4周后、化疗结束时以及化疗结束后6周。要求患者在填写问卷时“边想边说”。
患者在回答关于功能问题和限制时采用了各种反应策略,这影响了量表的准确性。患者的得分表明,他们通过逐字理解问题的措辞、猜测自己在未进行的活动中的功能,以及忽略或排除某些无法进行的活动,表现出比实际情况更少的限制。
晚期患者根据他们在特定情况下认为正常的情况来评估自己的功能。他们的回答可以根据评估过程的变化来解读(Rapkin和Schwartz,2004年;《健康与生活质量成果》,2,14)。在评估一组关于身体和角色功能的问题质量时应更加谨慎。