Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Palliat Med. 2010 Jan;24(1):17-37. doi: 10.1177/0269216309346593. Epub 2009 Oct 20.
In this literature review we evaluated the feasibility and clinimetric quality of quality-of-life (QoL) measurement instruments suitable for use in palliative care.
We conducted a systematic literature review to identify instruments measuring (at least one domain of) QoL. We selected articles that present data on patients receiving palliative care and at least one measurement property. A checklist was used to describe the characteristics of the instruments, and a widely accepted rating list was used to evaluate the clinimetric aspects.
29 instruments were identified and evaluated, most of which were targeted at palliative patients in general. None of the instruments demonstrated satisfactory results for all measurement properties. Fourteen instruments received positive ratings for construct validity. Thirteen instruments were tested for reliability, but only two were tested adequately and had positive results (ICC>0.70). Responsiveness was not tested adequately for any of the instruments. Very few of the studies provided information on the interpretation of the scores. Overall, the MQOL, followed by the QUAL-E and the QODD, received the best ratings for their measurement properties.
Many measurement instruments were identified, but most had not yet been adequately evaluated. The evaluation of existing instruments with good content validity should have priority over the development of new instruments.
在这篇文献综述中,我们评估了适合姑息治疗使用的生命质量(QoL)测量工具的可行性和计量学质量。
我们进行了系统的文献综述,以确定测量(至少一个 QoL 领域)的工具。我们选择了报告接受姑息治疗的患者和至少一项测量特性数据的文章。使用检查表描述仪器的特征,并使用广泛接受的评分表评估计量学方面。
确定并评估了 29 种工具,其中大多数针对一般姑息治疗患者。没有一种工具在所有测量特性上都表现出令人满意的结果。有 14 种工具的结构有效性得到了积极评价。有 13 种工具进行了可靠性测试,但只有两种经过充分测试且结果为阳性(ICC>0.70)。对于任何一种工具,反应度都没有得到充分测试。很少有研究提供关于评分解释的信息。总体而言,MQOL、其次是 QUAL-E 和 QODD,在测量特性方面获得了最佳评价。
确定了许多测量工具,但大多数尚未得到充分评估。应该优先对具有良好内容有效性的现有工具进行评估,而不是开发新工具。