Health and Social Care Economics Group, Caring Futures Institute, College of Nursing and Health Sciences, Flinders University, Sturt North, GPO Box 2100, Adelaide, 5001, South Australia.
Registry of Senior Australians, South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, South, Australia.
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2024 May 30;22(1):40. doi: 10.1186/s12955-024-02257-8.
The Quality of Life-Aged Care Consumers (QOL-ACC), a valid preference-based instrument, has been rolled out in Australia as part of the National Quality Indicator (QI) program since April 2023 to monitor and benchmark the quality of life of aged care recipients. As the QOL-ACC is being used to collect quality of life data longitudinally as one of the key aged care QI indicators, it is imperative to establish the reliability of the QOL-ACC in aged care settings. Therefore, we aimed to assess the reliability of the QOL-ACC and compare its performance with the EQ-5D-5L.
Home care recipients completed a survey including the QOL-ACC, EQ-5D-5L and two global items for health and quality of life at baseline (T1) and 2 weeks later (T2). Using T1 and T2 data, the Gwet's AC2 and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were estimated for the dimension levels and overall scores agreements respectively. The standard error of measurement (SEM) and the smallest detectable change (SDC) were also calculated. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for respondents who did not change their response to global item of quality of life and health between T1 and T2.
Of the 83 respondents who completed T1 and T2 surveys, 78 respondents (mean ± SD age, 73.6 ± 5.3 years; 56.4% females) reported either no or one level change in their health and/or quality of life between T1 and T2. Gwet's AC2 ranged from 0.46 to 0.63 for the QOL-ACC dimensions which were comparable to the EQ-5D-5L dimensions (Gwet's AC2 ranged from 0.52 to 0.77). The ICC for the QOL-ACC (0.85; 95% CI, 0.77-0.90) was comparable to the EQ-5D-5L (0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.88). The SEM for the QOL-ACC (0.08) was slightly smaller than for the EQ-5D-5L (0.11). The SDC for the QOL-ACC and the EQ-5D-5L for individual subjects were 0.22 and 0.30 respectively. Sensitivity analyses stratified by quality of life and health status confirmed the base case results.
The QOL-ACC demonstrated a good test-retest reliability similar to the EQ-5D-5L, supporting its repeated use in aged care settings. Further studies will provide evidence of responsiveness of the QOL-ACC to aged care-specific interventions in aged care settings.
作为国家质量指标(QI)计划的一部分,自 2023 年 4 月以来,生活质量-老年护理消费者(QOL-ACC)已在澳大利亚推出,这是一种有效的基于偏好的工具,用于监测和基准化老年护理接受者的生活质量。由于 QOL-ACC 被用作收集生活质量数据的工具,作为关键的老年护理 QI 指标之一,因此必须在老年护理环境中建立 QOL-ACC 的可靠性。因此,我们旨在评估 QOL-ACC 的可靠性,并将其性能与 EQ-5D-5L 进行比较。
家庭护理接受者在基线(T1)和 2 周后(T2)完成了一项调查,包括 QOL-ACC、EQ-5D-5L 和两个用于健康和生活质量的全球项目。使用 T1 和 T2 数据,分别估计维度水平和总体得分的 Gwet's AC2 和组内相关系数(ICC)。还计算了测量标准误差(SEM)和最小可检测变化(SDC)。对于在 T1 和 T2 之间对生活质量和健康的全球项目没有改变其回答的受访者进行了敏感性分析。
在完成 T1 和 T2 调查的 83 名受访者中,78 名受访者(平均年龄±标准差,73.6±5.3 岁;56.4%为女性)报告在 T1 和 T2 之间健康和/或生活质量没有或只有一个水平的变化。QOL-ACC 维度的 Gwet's AC2 范围为 0.46 至 0.63,与 EQ-5D-5L 维度相当(Gwet's AC2 范围为 0.52 至 0.77)。QOL-ACC 的 ICC(0.85;95%CI,0.77-0.90)与 EQ-5D-5L(0.83;95%CI,0.74-0.88)相当。QOL-ACC 的 SEM(0.08)略小于 EQ-5D-5L(0.11)。QOL-ACC 和 EQ-5D-5L 个体受试者的 SDC 分别为 0.22 和 0.30。按生活质量和健康状况分层的敏感性分析证实了基础案例结果。
QOL-ACC 表现出与 EQ-5D-5L 相似的良好重测可靠性,支持其在老年护理环境中的重复使用。进一步的研究将提供证据表明 QOL-ACC 对老年护理环境中特定于老年护理的干预措施的反应能力。