PSSRU, University of Kent, UK.
Soc Sci Med. 2011 Dec;73(12):1766-74. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.09.023. Epub 2011 Oct 10.
How should we measure the value of long-term (social) care? This paper describes a care-related quality of life instrument (ASCOT) and considers aspects of its validity. In particular the aim is to assess whether ASCOT is better suited to measuring the impact of long-term care services than the EQ5D health-related quality of life measure. Long-term care services tend to be more concerned with addressing the day-to-day consequences of long-term conditions. As such, a quality of life measure should not be overly focused on the potential impact of services on personal ability and should instead consider how services directly help people to function in everyday life. Construct validity was judged by assessing the degree to which measured quality of life improvement was consistent with the theorised positive correlation between quality of life and the use of home care services. In a 2008/9 sample of people using care services in England, we found that the impact of service use was significant when measured by ASCOT, but not significant when using EQ5D. The results support our hypothesis that ASCOT has greater construct validity in this case.
我们应该如何衡量长期（社会）护理的价值？本文介绍了一种与护理相关的生活质量评估工具（ASCOT），并考虑了其有效性的各个方面。特别是，目的是评估 ASCOT 是否比 EQ5D 健康相关生活质量评估工具更适合衡量长期护理服务的影响。长期护理服务往往更关注长期疾病的日常后果。因此，生活质量评估工具不应过于关注服务对个人能力的潜在影响，而应考虑服务如何直接帮助人们在日常生活中发挥作用。通过评估生活质量改善与生活质量与家庭护理服务使用之间的理论上的正相关关系的一致性，来判断结构有效性。在 2008/9 年英格兰使用护理服务的人群样本中，我们发现，使用 ASCOT 测量时，服务使用的影响是显著的，但使用 EQ5D 时则不显著。结果支持我们的假设，即 ASCOT 在这种情况下具有更高的结构有效性。
