Quality of Life Measurements: Any Value for Clinical Practice?

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthias Büttner ◽  
Veit Zebralla ◽  
Andreas Dietz ◽  
Susanne Singer
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Quality Of Life Measurements

Using quality-of-life measurements in clinical practice

Surgery ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 141 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vic Velanovich
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Quality Of Life Measurements

scholarly journals Quality of life assessments in clinical practice using either the EORTC-QLQ-C30 or the SEIOQL-DW: a randomized study

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Åsa Kettis ◽  
Hanna Fagerlind ◽  
Jan-Erik Frödin ◽  
Bengt Glimelius ◽  
Lena Ring
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Health Related Qol ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Background Effective patient-physician communication can improve patient understanding, agreement on treatment and adherence. This may, in turn, impact on clinical outcomes and patient quality of life (QoL). One way to improve communication is by using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Heretofore, studies of the impact of using PROMs in clinical practice have mostly evaluated the use of standardized PROMs. However, there is reason to believe that individualized instruments may be more appropriate for this purpose. The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of the standardized QoL-instrument, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life C-30 (EORTC-QOL-C30) and the individualized QoL instrument, the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life-Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW), in clinical practice. Methods In a prospective, open-label, controlled intervention study at two hospital out-patient clinics, 390 patients with gastrointestinal cancer were randomly assigned either to complete the EORTC-QOL-C30 or the SEIQoL-DW immediately before the consultation, with their responses being shared with their physician. This was repeated in 3–5 consultations over a period of 4–6 months. The primary outcome measure was patients’ health-related QoL, as measured by FACIT-G. Patients’ satisfaction with the consultation and survival were secondary outcomes. Results There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to study outcomes. Neither intervention instrument resulted in any significant changes in health-related QoL, or in any of the secondary outcomes, over time. This may reflect either a genuine lack of effect or sub-optimization of the intervention. Since there was no comparison to standard care an effect in terms of lack of deterioration over time cannot be excluded. Conclusions Future studies should focus on the implementation process, including the training of physicians to use the instruments and their motivation for doing so. The effects of situational use of standardized or individualized instruments should also be explored. The effectiveness of the different approaches may depend on contextual factors including physician and patient preferences.

scholarly journals Health-Related Quality of Life Following Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Hematology ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 2010 (1) ◽  
pp. 248-254 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret Bevans
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Hematopoietic Stem ◽  
Allogeneic Hsct ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related

Abstract It is common knowledge that an allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) will have an enormous impact on the lives of transplant recipients and their families. Once an appropriate donor is identified, the curative potential of this treatment often drives the decision to proceed knowing that there will be intense physiologic toxicities and adverse effects on health-related quality of life (HRQL). Twenty-five years ago, HRQL was identified as an efficacy parameter in the evaluation of new anticancer drug therapy. Overall, the evidence suggests that an allogeneic HSCT has a significant impact on the overall HRQL of recipients, which is a result of decrements across all dimensions, including a significant symptom profile. The degree of impact on overall HRQL and the multiple dimensions varies across the transplant trajectory. Specific HRQL dimensions, such as physical function and symptoms, are easily incorporated into a clinician's assessment whereas other dimensions (eg, psychosocial) are less commonly integrated. The translation of HRQL results to improve clinical practice is not well established. Clinicians are often uncertain when to assess the scope of HRQL and how to interpret the information in a clinically meaningful way. The purpose of this review is to highlight the quality-of-life effects of allogeneic HSCT and discuss application into clinical practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document