Dataset Information

InterRAI Subjective Quality of Life Scale for Mental Health and Addiction Settings: A Self-Reported Measure Developed From a Multi-National Study.

ABSTRACT: Background: Measuring Quality of Life (QoL) in mental health using self-reported items is important for evaluating the quality of service and understanding the person's experience of the care received. Objective: The aim of this research was to develop and validate a self-reported QoL instrument for inpatient and community mental health settings. Methods: Data were collected from diverse research sites in Canada, Belgium, Russia, Finland, Brazil, and Hong Kong, using the 37-item interRAI Quality of Life Survey for Mental Health and Addictions. The survey was administrated to 2,218 participants from inpatient and community mental health settings, assisted living, and the general community. We randomly divided the sample into a training and a test sample (70 and 30%, respectively). We conducted principal component analysis (PCA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using the training sample to identify potential factor structure. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models were then fitted to finalize and externally validate the measurement model using training and test data, respectively. Results: PCA, EFA, and CFA of the training sample collectively suggested a 23-item scale measuring four latent constructs: well-being and hope (8 items), relationship (7 items), support (5 items), and activity (3 items). This model was supported by the CFA of the test sample. The goodness-of-fit statistics root mean square error, comparative fit index and Tucker-Lewis index were 0.03, 1.00, and 0.99, respectively. Estimated Cronbach's alpha based on the test data was 0.92. Raw Cronbach's alpha values for the subscales were 0.86 for well-being and hope, 0.86 for relationship, 0.69 for support, and 0.72 for activity. Conclusions: The interRAI SQoL-MHA scale is a valid instrument to measure QoL in mental health settings. The instrument will support the evaluation of the quality of care and can also be used for future research to produce SQoL-MHA values on a quality adjusted-life-year scale, facilitating the evaluation of various mental health interventions.

SUBMITTER: Luo H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8298814 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe interRAI suite of assessment instruments can provide valuable information to support person-specific care planning across the continuum of care. Comprehensive clinical information is collected with these instruments, including disease diagnoses. In Canada, interRAI data holdings represent some of the largest repositories of clinical information in the country for persons with neurological conditions. This study examined the accuracy of the diagnostic information captured by interRAI instruments designed for use in the home care, long-term care and mental health care settings as compared with national administrative databases.MethodsThe interRAI assessments were matched with an inpatient hospital record and emergency department (ED) visit record in the preceding 90 days. Diagnoses captured on the interRAI instruments were compared to those recorded in either administrative record for each individual. Diagnostic validity was examined through sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value analysis for the following conditions: multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, Parkinson's disease, traumatic brain injury, stroke, diabetes mellitus, heart failure and reactive airway disease.ResultsIn the three large study samples (home care: n = 128,448; long-term care: n = 26,644; mental health: n = 13,812), interRAI diagnoses demonstrated high specificity when compared to administrative records, for both neurological conditions (range 0.80-1.00) and comparative chronic diseases (range 0.83-1.00). Sensitivity and positive predictive values (PPV) were more varied by specific diagnosis, with sensitivities and PPV for neurological conditions ranging from 0.23 to 0.94 and 0.14 to 0.77, respectively. The interRAI assessments routinely captured more cases of the diagnoses of interest than the administrative records.ConclusionsThe interRAI assessment collected accurate information about disease diagnoses when compared to administrative records within three months. Such information is likely relevant to day-to-day care in these three environments and can be used to inform care planning and resource allocation decisions.

Project description:BackgroundThere is a need for a survey instrument to measure arthralgia (joint pain) that has been psychometrically validated in the context of existing reference instruments. We developed the 16-item Patient-Reported Arthralgia Inventory (PRAI) to measure arthralgia severity in 16 joints, in the context of a longitudinal cohort study to assess aromatase inhibitor-associated arthralgia in breast cancer survivors and arthralgia in postmenopausal women without breast cancer. We sought to evaluate the reliability and validity of the PRAI instrument in these populations, as well as to examine the relationship of patient-reported morning stiffness and arthralgia.MethodsWe administered the PRAI on paper in 294 women (94 initiating aromatase inhibitor therapy and 200 postmenopausal women without breast cancer) at weeks 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, and 52, as well as once in 36 women who had taken but were no longer taking aromatase inhibitor therapy.ResultsCronbach's alpha was 0.9 for internal consistency of the PRAI. Intraclass correlation coefficients of test-retest reliability were in the range of 0.87-0.96 over repeated PRAI administrations; arthralgia severity was higher in the non-cancer group at baseline than at subsequent assessments. Women with joint comorbidities tended to have higher PRAI scores than those without (estimated difference in mean scores: -0.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.5, -0.2; P<0.001). The PRAI was highly correlated with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Endocrine Subscale item "I have pain in my joints" (reference instrument; Spearman r range: 0.76-0.82). Greater arthralgia severity on the PRAI was also related to decreased physical function (r=-0.47, 95% CI -0.55, -0.37; P<0.001), higher pain interference (r=0.65, 95% CI 0.57-0.72; P<0.001), less active performance status (estimated difference in location (-0.6, 95% CI -0.9, -0.4; P<0.001), and increased morning stiffness duration (r=0.62, 95% CI 0.54-0.69; P<0.0001).ConclusionWe conclude that the psychometric properties of the PRAI are satisfactory for measuring arthralgia severity.

Project description:ObjectivesThis study aimed to develop and validate a tailored patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) evaluating the patient experience of recurrent urinary tract infection (rUTI) symptom severity. This measure was designed to supplement clinical testing methods, allowing full assessment of the patient experience of rUTI symptom burden, while enhancing patient-centred UTI management and monitoring.Subjects and methodsThe Recurrent Urinary Tract Infection Symptom Scale (RUTISS) was developed and validated using a three-stage methodology, in accordance with gold-standard recommendations. Firstly, a two-round Delphi study was conducted to gain insights from 15 international expert clinicians working in rUTI, developing an initial pool of novel questionnaire items, assessing content validity and making item refinements. Next, two phases of one-to-one semi-structured cognitive interviews were conducted with a diverse sample of 28 people experiencing rUTI to assess questionnaire comprehensiveness and comprehensibility, making refinements after each phase. Finally, a comprehensive pilot of the RUTISS was conducted with 240 people experiencing rUTI across 24 countries, providing data for psychometric testing and item reduction.ResultsExploratory factor analysis indicated a four-factor structure comprising: 'urinary pain and discomfort', 'urinary urgency', 'bodily sensations' and 'urinary presentation', together accounting for 75.4% of the total variance in data. Qualitative feedback from expert clinicians and patients indicated strong content validity for items, which was supported by high content validity indices in the Delphi study (I-CVI > 0.75). Internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the RUTISS subscales were excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.87-0.94 and ICC = 0.73-0.82, respectively), and construct validity was strong (Spearman's ρ = 0.60-0.82).ConclusionThe RUTISS is a 28-item questionnaire with excellent reliability and validity, which dynamically assesses patient-reported rUTI symptoms and pain. This new PROM offers a unique opportunity to critically inform and strategically enhance the quality of rUTI management, patient-clinician interactions, and shared-decision making by monitoring key patient-reported outcomes.

Dataset Information

InterRAI Subjective Quality of Life Scale for Mental Health and Addiction Settings: A Self-Reported Measure Developed From a Multi-National Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets