Purpose: Individualized quality of life (QoL) measures differ from traditional inventories in that QoL domains/weights are not predetermined, but identified by the individual. We assessed practicability of the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual QoL-Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW) interview in severely affected multiple sclerosis (MS) patients; the key QoL dimensions identified; and the correlation of the SEIQoL-DW index score with standard patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Methods: Participants were people with severe MS who performed the baseline visit of the PeNSAMI trial (ISRCTN73082124). The SEIQoL-DW was administered at the patient’s home by a trained examiner. Patients then received the following PROMs: the Core-Palliative care Outcome Scale (Core-POS), the Palliative care Outcome Scale-Symptoms-MS (POS-S-MS), the European Quality of Life Five Dimensions-3L (EQ-5D-3L), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Results: Of 59 enrolled patients, 11 (19 %) did not receive the SEIQoL-DW (and the other PROMs) because of severe cognitive compromise or inability to communicate. SEIQoL-DW administration was completed and deemed valid in all 48 cases (mean age 60 years, 58 % women, median Expanded Disability Status Scale score 8.5). Mean SEIQoL-DW index score was 59.1 (SD 25.5). The most commonly nominated SEIQoL-DW areas were family (94 % of the patients), relationships, and leisure activities (both 65 %). Core-POS and POS-S-MS contained 70 % of the SEIQoL-DW-nominated areas. Nevertheless, correlations between SEIQoL-DW index, Core-POS, and POS-S-MS (and the other PROMs) were negligible. Conclusions: Individualized QoL can be assessed in severely affected MS patients, providing information that is not tracked by the standard inventories Core-POS, POS-S-MS, EQ-5D-3L, and HADS.

Individualized quality of life of severely affected multiple sclerosis patients: practicability and value in comparison with standard inventories

Morone G.;
2016

Abstract

Purpose: Individualized quality of life (QoL) measures differ from traditional inventories in that QoL domains/weights are not predetermined, but identified by the individual. We assessed practicability of the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual QoL-Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW) interview in severely affected multiple sclerosis (MS) patients; the key QoL dimensions identified; and the correlation of the SEIQoL-DW index score with standard patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Methods: Participants were people with severe MS who performed the baseline visit of the PeNSAMI trial (ISRCTN73082124). The SEIQoL-DW was administered at the patient’s home by a trained examiner. Patients then received the following PROMs: the Core-Palliative care Outcome Scale (Core-POS), the Palliative care Outcome Scale-Symptoms-MS (POS-S-MS), the European Quality of Life Five Dimensions-3L (EQ-5D-3L), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Results: Of 59 enrolled patients, 11 (19 %) did not receive the SEIQoL-DW (and the other PROMs) because of severe cognitive compromise or inability to communicate. SEIQoL-DW administration was completed and deemed valid in all 48 cases (mean age 60 years, 58 % women, median Expanded Disability Status Scale score 8.5). Mean SEIQoL-DW index score was 59.1 (SD 25.5). The most commonly nominated SEIQoL-DW areas were family (94 % of the patients), relationships, and leisure activities (both 65 %). Core-POS and POS-S-MS contained 70 % of the SEIQoL-DW-nominated areas. Nevertheless, correlations between SEIQoL-DW index, Core-POS, and POS-S-MS (and the other PROMs) were negligible. Conclusions: Individualized QoL can be assessed in severely affected MS patients, providing information that is not tracked by the standard inventories Core-POS, POS-S-MS, EQ-5D-3L, and HADS.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11697/181954
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 8
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 10
social impact