Parker Ben, Petrou Stavros, Underwood Martin, Madan Jason
Warwick Clinical Trials Unit, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK.
BMJ Open. 2017 Apr 27;7(4):e012779. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012779.
To compare assessments of health-related quality of life outcomes of care home residents reported by residents and care staff acting as proxies.
Linear regression and bivariate modelling of paired assessments from care home residents and care staff.
78 care homes in 2 regions in England.
556 care home residents aged 65 years or older and care staff.
EQ-5D utility scores and responses to individual EQ-5D dimensions.
The depression status, cognitive function, physical function, activities of daily living, social engagement, pain and dementia diagnosis of care home residents all predicted discrepancies in EQ-5D reporting. For residents with no depressive symptoms, care staff underestimated residents' mean EQ-5D utility score by 0.134 (95% CI 0.097 to 0.171) and for those with severe depressive symptoms they overstated mean utility scores by 0.222 (95% CI 0.104 to 0.339). With increasing levels of pain in residents the care staff progressively estimated EQ-5D utilities above self-reported values; by 0.236 (95% CI 0.003 to 0.469) in those with the second highest pain scores. For those with no cognitive impairment, proxies overstated mean utility scores by 0.097 (95% CI 0.049 to 0.146), while for those with severe cognitive impairment they underestimated mean utility scores by 0.192 (95% CI 0.143 to 0.241).
Care home residents and staff appear to differ fundamentally in their assessment of the health-related quality of life, as measured by the EQ-5D, of residents with different levels of depression, pain and/or cognitive impairment. This could lead to interventions evaluated using proxy-based quality-adjusted life year estimates being wrongly rejected on cost-effectiveness grounds and may also make it difficult for carers to act as advocates with health and social care professionals for certain groups of residents. A more resident-focussed approach to assessment of health-related quality of life is needed.
比较由居民本人及作为代理人的护理人员报告的养老院居民健康相关生活质量结果评估。
对养老院居民和护理人员的配对评估进行线性回归和双变量建模。
英格兰两个地区的78家养老院。
556名65岁及以上的养老院居民和护理人员。
EQ-5D效用评分及对EQ-5D各维度的回答。
养老院居民的抑郁状态、认知功能、身体功能、日常生活活动能力、社交参与度、疼痛情况及痴呆诊断均预测了EQ-5D报告中的差异。对于无抑郁症状的居民,护理人员将居民的平均EQ-5D效用评分低估了0.134(95%可信区间0.097至0.171),而对于有严重抑郁症状的居民,护理人员将平均效用评分高估了0.222(95%可信区间0.104至0.339)。随着居民疼痛程度的增加,护理人员对EQ-5D效用的估计逐渐高于自我报告值;在疼痛评分第二高的居民中高估了0.236(95%可信区间0.003至0.469)。对于无认知障碍的居民,代理人将平均效用评分高估了0.097(95%可信区间0.049至0.146),而对于有严重认知障碍的居民,代理人将平均效用评分低估了0.192(95%可信区间0.143至0.241)。
养老院居民和工作人员在评估不同抑郁、疼痛和/或认知障碍程度居民的EQ-5D健康相关生活质量方面似乎存在根本差异。这可能导致基于代理人的质量调整生命年估计值评估的干预措施因成本效益原因被错误拒绝,也可能使护理人员难以作为某些居民群体的代言人向健康和社会护理专业人员提出诉求。需要一种更以居民为中心的健康相关生活质量评估方法。