Measuring context that matters: validation of the modular Tele-QoL patient-reported outcome and experience measure
-
Published:2023-07-17
Issue:11
Volume:32
Page:3223-3234
-
ISSN:0962-9343
-
Container-title:Quality of Life Research
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Qual Life Res
Author:
Greffin KlaraORCID, Muehlan HolgerORCID, van den Berg NeeltjeORCID, Hoffmann WolfgangORCID, Ritter OliverORCID, Oeff Michael, Speerfork Sven, Schomerus GeorgORCID, Schmidt SilkeORCID
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
A setting-sensitive instrument for assessing Quality of Life (QoL) in Telemedicine (TM) was unavailable. To close this gap, a content-valid “add-on” measure was developed. In parallel, a brief index was derived featuring six items that summarise the main content of the multidimensional assessment. After pre- and pilot-testing, the psychometric performance of the final measures was investigated in an independent validation study.
Methods
The questionnaires were applied along with other standardised instruments of similar concepts as well as associated, yet disparate concepts for validation purposes. The sample consisted of patients with depression or heart failure, with or without TM (n = 200). Data analyses were aimed at calculating descriptive statistics and testing the psychometric performance on item, scale, and instrument level, including different types of validity and reliability.
Results
The proposed factor structure of the multidimensional Tele-QoL measure has been confirmed. Reliability coefficients for internal consistency, split-half, and test-retest reliability of the subscales and index reached sufficient values. The Tele-QoL subscales and the index demonstrated Rasch scalability. Validity of both instruments can be assumed. Evidence for discriminant construct validity was provided. Known-groups validity was indicated by respective score differences for various classes of disease severity.
Conclusion
Both measures show convincing psychometric properties. The final multidimensional Tele-QoL assessment consists of six outcome scales and two impact scales assessing (un-)intended effects of TM on QoL. In addition, the Tele-QoL index provides a short alternative for outcome assessment. The Tele-QoL measures can be used as complementary modules to existing QoL instruments capturing healthcare-related aspects of QoL from the patients’ perspective.
Funder
German Innovation Fund Universität Greifswald
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference61 articles.
1. Haraldstad, K., Wahl, A., Andenæs, R., Andersen, J. R., Andersen, M. H., Beisland, E., Borge, C. R., Engebretsen, E., Eisemann, M., Halvorsrud, L., Hanssen, T. A., Haugstvedt, A., Haugland, T., Johansen, V. A., Larsen, M. H., Løvereide, L., Løyland, B., Kvarme, L. G., & P. Moons… S. Helseth,. (2019). A systematic review of quality of life research in medicine and health sciences. Quality of Life Research, 28(10), 2641–2650. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-019-02214-9 2. Patrick, D. L., & Deyo, R. A. (1989). Generic and disease-specific measures in assessing health status and quality of life. Medical Care, 27(3 Suppl), S217–S232. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-198903001-00018 3. Knapp, A., Harst, L., Hager, S., Schmitt, J., & Scheibe, M. (2021). Use of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures within evaluation studies of telemedicine applications: Systematic review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(11), e30042. https://doi.org/10.2196/30042 4. Greffin, K., Muehlan, H., Rosenkranz, E., van den Berg, N., Hoffmann, W., Ritter, O., Oeff, M., Schomerus, G. & Schmidt, S, “Telemedicine and patient-reported outcomes in chronic conditions: concordance and discrepancy of purpose, concepts, and methods of measurement—A systematic literature review (submitted)”. 5. Greffin, K., Muehlan, H., Rosenkranz, E., van den Berg, N., Hoffmann, W., Ritter, O., Oeff, M., Schomerus, G., & Schmidt, S., “Telemedicine and patient-reported outcomes in mental illnesses: concordance and discrepancy of purpose, concepts, and methods of measurement—a systematic literature review (submitted)”.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|