«Declared quality of life»: new perspectives for assessing patients’ quality of life in clinical medicine
https://doi.org/10.37489/2588-0519-2024-3-26-33
EDN: AAJPJM
Abstract
In modern patient-oriented medical care, quality of life is an important criterion for a comprehensive assessment of the patient's health and evaluation of treatment effectiveness. This article is devoted to the current methodological issues of assessing quality of life and other patient-reported outcomes (PRO) and attempts to reveal the difficulties of interpreting PRO data obtained in real-world clinical practice. A new concept for identifying significant changes in the patient's general health condition in clinical practice is presented, and a new model of quality of life outcomes before and after treatment is considered. The concepts of “declared quality of life”, “index of achieved quality of life” and “declared clinical effect” have been declared. Assessment of the declared quality of life of the patient and determination of the index of the achieved quality of life can be used for practical purposes to implement the principle of patient-oriented care in clinical practice.
About the Authors
Yu. A. Sukhonos
The Association of Specialists and Organizations and the Medical Field of Activity «Silver Cross»
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Yuriy A. Sukhonos — Dr. Sci (Med.), President
Saint-Petersburg
T. P. Nikitina
Saint-Petersburg State University Hospital
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatiana P. Nikitina — PhD, Cand. Sci. (Med), Public Health Specialist of the Department of Quality of Life Monitoring
Saint-Petersburg
N. Yu. Sukhonos
Military Medical Academy named after S. M. Kirov
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Nikodim Yu. Sukhonos — 3‑year cadet
Saint-Petersburg
T. I. Ionova
Saint-Petersburg State University Hospital
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatyana I. Ionova — Dr. Sci (Biol.), Professor, Head of the Department of Quality of Life Monitoring
Saint-Petersburg
References
1. Skvorczova VI. National project “Healthcare” − the path to innovative medicine (In Russ.). Доступно по: https://static-3.rosminzdrav.ru/system/attachments/attaches/000/045/217/original/Презентация_к_докладу_В.И.Скворцовой.pdf?1560941849 Ссылка активна на 27.08.2019.
2. Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2001. doi: 10.17226/10027.
3. Platonova NI, Smyshlyaev AV, Melnikov YuYu. Statutory Aspects of the Establishment of a Patient-Oriented Approach in the Healthcare Delivery System in the Russian Federation (on the Modern Stage). Medicinskoe pravo. 2020;3:26-31. (In Russ.).
4. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Shared decision making. NICE Guideline [NG197. 17 June 2021. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng197
5. Novik AA, Ionova TI. Rukovodstvo po issledovaniyu kachestva zhizni v medicine. 4th ed. Ed by Yu.A. Shevchenko. Moscow: National Medical and Surgical Center named after N.I. Pirogov; 2021. (In Russ.).
6. Fayers PM, Machin D. Quality of Life: The Assessment, Analysis and Reporting of Patient-reported Outcomes (3rd еd.). Wiley-Blackwell; 2016.
7. Baldwin M, Spong A, Doward L, Gnanasakthy A. Patient-reported outcomes, patient-reported information: from randomized controlled trials to the social web and beyond. Patient. 2011;4(1):11-7. doi: 10.2165/11585530-000000000-00000.
8. NHS Information Centre. Patient Reported Outcomes Measures (PROMs). Retrieved 2012 Sep 1.
9. Revicki DA. Patient assessment of treatment satisfaction: methods and practical issues. Gut. 2004 May;53 Suppl 4(Suppl 4):iv40-4. doi: 10.1136/gut.2003.034322.
10. Mikerova МS, Karovaykina EA, Garaeva AS. Standard patient satisfaction assessment criteria as a component of medical care quality. Health Care Standardization Problems. 2019;5-6:24-29. (In Russ).. doi: 10.26347/1607-2502201905-06024-029.
11. Copay AG, Subach BR, Glassman SD, et al. Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J. 2007 Sep-Oct;7(5):541-6. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2007.01.008.
12. Vanier A, Oort FJ, McClimans L, et al; Response Shift - in Sync Working Group. Response shift in patient-reported outcomes: definition, theory, and a revised model. Qual Life Res. 2021 Dec;30(12):3309-3322. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02846-w. Epub 2021 Apr 28. Erratum in: Qual Life Res. 2021 Dec;30(12):3323-3324. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02890-6.
13. Vanier A, Falissard B, Sébille V, Hardouin J-B. The complexity of interpreting changes observed over time in Health-Related Quality of Life: a short overview of 15 years of research on response shift theory. In: Perceived health and adaptation in chronic disease. Stakes and future challenge. New-York: Routledge; 2018. p. 202-230.
14. Ortega-Gómez E, Vicente-Galindo P, Martín-Rodero H, Galindo-Villardón P. Detection of response shift in health-related quality of life studies: a systematic review. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2022 Feb 5;20(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s12955-022-01926-w.
15. Schwartz CE, Andresen EM, Nosek MA, Krahn GL; RRTC Expert Panel on Health Status Measurement. Response shift theory: important implications for measuring quality of life in people with disability. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2007 Apr;88(4):529-36. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2006.12.032.
16. Springer International Publishing AG 2018. R. D. MacLeod, L. Block (eds.), Textbook of Palliative Care. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31738-0_8-1.
17. Goswami P, Oliva EN, Ionova T, et al. Paper and electronic versions of HM-PRO, a novel patient-reported outcome measure for hematology: an equivalence study. J Comp Eff Res. 2019 May;8(7):523-533. doi: 10.2217/cer-2018-0108.
18. Ionova TI, Bannikova AEu, Bykova AV, et al. Development and psychometric evaluation of the specific questionnaire for quality of life assessment in patients with hematological malignancies in clinical practice — HM-PRO. Bulletin of the Multinational Center for Quality of Life Research. 2020;35-36:86-104. (In Russ.).
19. Ionova TI, Andreevskaya EA, Babich EN, et al. Current Quality-of-Life Aspects in Patients with Classical Ph-Negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms in the Russian Federation: Overview of the Outcomes of the National Observational Program MPN-QoL-2020. Clinical oncohematology. 2022;15(2):176-97. (In Russ.). doi: 10.21320/2500-2139-2022-15-2-176-197.
20. Polishchuk EYu, Karateev AE, Potapova AS, et al. Need to assess the effect of therapy? Ask the patient! Nauchno-Prakticheskaya Revmatologia = Rheumatology Science and Practice. 2023;61(3):361–368 (In Russ.). doi: 10.47360/1995-4484-2023-361-368.
21. Karateev AE, Pogozheva EYu, Amirdzanova VN, et al. «I am getting better» and «I feel good»: searching for an objective criterion for a clinical response to analgesic therapy for rheumatic diseases. Sovremennaya Revmatologiya=Modern Rheumatology Journal. 2020;14(2):90-96. (In Russ.). doi: 10.14412/1996-7012-2020-2-90-96.
22. Tubach F, Wells GA, Ravaud P, Dougados M. Minimal clinically important difference, low disease activity state, and patient acceptable symptom state: methodological issues. J Rheumatol. 2005 Oct;32(10):2025-9.
23. Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant states in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the patient acceptable symptom state. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005 Jan;64(1):34-7. doi: 10.1136/ard.2004.023028.
24. Tubach F, Pham T, Skomsvoll JF, et al. Stability of the patient acceptable symptomatic state over time in outcome criteria in ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum. 2006 Dec 15;55(6):960-3. doi: 10.1002/art.22342.
25. Tubach F, Ravaud P, Martin-Mola E, et al. Minimum clinically important improvement and patient acceptable symptom state in pain and function in rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, chronic back pain, hand osteoarthritis, and hip and knee osteoarthritis: Results from a prospective multinational study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2012 Nov;64(11):1699-707. doi: 10.1002/acr.21747.
26. Duarte C, Santos E, da Silva JAP, et al. The Patient Experienced Symptom State (PESS): a patient-reported global outcome measure that may better reflect disease remission status. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2020 Nov 1;59(11):3458-3467. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/keaa149.
27. Kamper SJ, Maher CG, Mackay G. Global rating of change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design. J Man Manip Ther. 2009;17(3):163-70. doi: 10.1179/jmt.2009.17.3.163.
28. El-Haddad C, Hegazi I, Hu W. Understanding Patient Expectations of Health Care: A Qualitative Study. J Patient Exp. 2020 Dec;7(6):1724-1731. doi: 10.1177/2374373520921692.
29. A'aqoulah A, Kuyini AB, Albalas S. Exploring the Gap Between Patients' Expectations and Perceptions of Healthcare Service Quality. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2022 May 23;16:1295-1305. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S360852.
30. Berhane A, Enquselassie F. Patient expectations and their satisfaction in the context of public hospitals. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016 Sep 22;10:1919-1928. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S109982.
31. Barth J, Kern A, Lüthi S, Witt CM. Assessment of patients' expectations: development and validation of the Expectation for Treatment Scale (ETS). BMJ Open. 2019 Jun 17;9(6):e026712. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026712.
32. Rosenberger PH, Jokl P, Cameron A, Ickovics JR. Shared decision making, preoperative expectations, and postoperative reality: differences in physician and patient predictions and ratings of knee surgery outcomes. Arthroscopy. 2005 May;21(5):562-9. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2005.02.022.
33. Panda N, Haynes AB. Prioritizing the Patient Perspective in Oncologic Surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020 Jan;27(1):43-44. doi: 10.1245/s10434-019-07753-6.
34. Elwyn G, Frosch D, Thomson R, et al. Shared decision making: a model for clinical practice. J Gen Intern Med. 2012 Oct;27(10):1361-7. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2077-6.
35. Minichsdorfer C, Zeller O, Kirschbaum M, Berghoff AS, Bartsch R. Expectations and perception of cancer treatment goals in previously untreated patients. The EXPECT trial. Support Care Cancer. 2021 Jul;29(7):3585-3592. doi: 10.1007/s00520-020-05826-x.
36. Wu A, Snyder C. Getting ready for patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs) in clinical practice. Healthc Pap. 2012;11(4):48-53. doi: 10.12927/hcpap.2012.22705.
37. Ionova TI, Kirin VN, Sheidorova AC, et al. A Population Study of the Quality of Life of The Habitancy of the Chukotka Autonomous Area. Ekologiya cheloveka [Human Ecology. 2019;8:41-49. (In Russ.). doi: 10.33396/1728-0862-8-41-49.
Review
For citations:
Sukhonos Yu.A., Nikitina T.P., Sukhonos N.Yu., Ionova T.I. «Declared quality of life»: new perspectives for assessing patients’ quality of life in clinical medicine. Kachestvennaya Klinicheskaya Praktika = Good Clinical Practice. 2024;(3):26-33. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.37489/2588-0519-2024-3-26-33. EDN: AAJPJM
Views:
752
Email this article 