The relationship between quality of life, health and care transition: an empirical comparison in an older post-acute population

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Maria Crotty²  Julie Ratcliffe¹  Leah Couzner² 

[1] Flinders Centre for Clinical Change and Health Care Research, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia;Department of Rehabilitation and Aged Care, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia

关键词: Health economics;    Health services for the aged;    Quality of life;    Rehabilitation;    Geriatrics;    Aged;   

Others  :  825508
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7525-10-69

 received in 2011-12-09, accepted in 2012-05-22,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

The aim of this study was to explore, via empirical comparison, the relationship between quality of life, as measured by the ICECAP-O capability index (a new instrument designed to measure and value quality of life in older people), with both self-reported health status and the quality of care transition in adults aged 65 and over participating in two post-acute rehabilitation programs (outpatient day rehabilitation and the Australian National Transition Care residential program).

Methods

The ICECAP-O was administered to patients receiving either outpatient day rehabilitation (n = 53) or residential transition care (n = 29) during a face to face interview. The relationships between the ICECAP-O and other instruments, including the EQ-5D (a self-reported measure of health status) and CTM-3 (a self-reported measure of the quality of care transitions), the type of post-acute care being received and socio-demographic characteristics were examined.

Results

The mean ICECAP-O score for the total sample was 0.81 (SD: 0.15). Patients receiving outpatient day rehabilitation generally reported higher levels of capability, than patients receiving residential transition care (mean 0.82 [SD: 0.15] and 0.79 [SD: 0.164] respectively), however these differences were not statistically significant. The mean EQ-5D score for the total sample was somewhat lower than the ICECAP-O (mean 0.52; SD: 0.27) indicating significant levels of health impairment with the outpatient day rehabilitation group demonstrating slightly higher levels of health status than the transition care group (mean 0.54 [SD: 0.254] and mean 0.49 [SD: 0.30]). The ICECAP-O was found to be positively correlated with both the CTM-3 (Spearman’s r =0.234; p ≤ 0.05) and the EQ-5D (Spearman’s r = 0.437; p ≤ 0.001). The relationships between the total EQ-5D and CTM-3 scores and the individual attributes of the ICECAP-O indicate health status and quality of care transition in this patient population to be influential in some, but not all aspects of capability.

Conclusions

The correlations between the ICECAP-O, EQ-5D and CTM-3 instruments illustrate that capability is strongly and positively associated with health-related quality of life and the quality of care transitions. However further research is required to further examine the construct validity of the ICECAP-O and to examine its potential for incorporation into economic evaluation.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Couzner et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Commission P: Trends In Aged Care Services: Some Implications. In Commission Research Paper. Canberra, Australia; 2008.
• [2]Australian Bureau of Statistics: Population Projections Australia. In Australian Bureau of Statistics. Canberra, Australia; 2008. Cat no. 3222.0
• [3]Department of Health and Ageing: Ageing and Aged Care in Australia. In Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Canberra, Australia; 2008.
• [4]Australian Government Treasury: Australia to 2050: Future challenges. In In Intergenerational Report. Canberra, Australia; 2010.
• [5]Hopman W, Verner J: Quality of life during and after inpatient stroke rehabilitation. Stroke 2003, 34:801-805.
• [6]Department of Health and Ageing: Transition Care Program: Program Guidelines. In Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Canberra, Australia; 2005.
• [7]Gray LC, Peel NM, Crotty M, Kurrle SE, Giles LC, Cameron ID: How effective are programs at managing transition from hospital to home? A case study of the Australian transition care program. BMC Geriatr 2012, 12:6. BioMed Central Full Text
• [8]Flinders Consulting: National Evaluation of the Transition Care Program: Final Evaluation Report. In Flinders Consulting. Adelaide, Australia; 2008. RFT 206/0506
• [9]Folstein M, Folstein S, McHugh P: "Mini Mental State" A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 1975, 12:189-198.
• [10]Coast J, Flynn T, Natarajan L, Sproston K, Lewis J, Louviere J, et al.: Valuing the ICECAP capability index for older people. Soc Sci Med 2008, 67:874-882.
• [11]Coast J, Peters TJ, Natarajan L, Sproston K, Flynn T: An assessment of the construct validity of the descriptive system for the ICECAP capability measure for older people. Qual Life Res 2008, 17:967-976.
• [12]Rabin R, de Charro F: EQ-5D: A measure of health status from the EuroQol Group. Ann Med 2001, 33:337-343.
• [13]Brazier J, Walters S, Nicholl J, Kohler B: Using the SF-36 and EuroQoL on an elderly population. Qual Life Res 1996, 5:195-204.
• [14]Coast J, Peters T, Richards S, Gunnell D: Use of the EuroQoL among elderly acute care patients. Qual Life Res 1998, 7:1-10.
• [15]Holland R, Smith R, Harvey I, Swift L, Lenaghan E: Assessing quality of life in the elderly: A direct comparison of the EQ-5D and AQoL. Health Econ 2004, 13:793-805.
• [16]Coleman E, Smith J, Frank J, Eilertsen T, Thiare J, Kramer A: Development and testing of a measure designed to assess the quality of care transitions. Int J Integrated Care 2002, 2:1-9.
• [17]Coleman E, Parry C, Chalmers S, Chugh A, Mahoney E: The central role of performance measurement in improving the quality of Transitional Care. Home Health Care Serv Q 2007, 26:93-104.
• [18]Coleman EA, Smith JD, Frank JC, Min S, Parry C, Kramer AM: Preparing patients and caregivers to participate in care delivered across settings: The care transitions intervention. JAGS 2004, 52:1817-1825.
• [19]Flynn T: Assessing quality of life among British older people using the ICECAP-O capability measure. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2011, 9:317-329.
• [20]Flynn T, Louviere J, Huynh E, Terlich F: What are Australian preferences for quality of life? Results from best-worst scaling studies to value the ICECAP instruments. In Australian Health Economics Society Meeting. Australian Health Economics Society Meeting, Sydney, Australia; 2010.
• [21]Viney R, Norman R, King M, Cronin P, Street D, Knox SA, Ratcliffe J, Brazier J: Time Trade-Off Derived EQ-5D Weights for Australia. Value Health 2011, 14:928-936.
• [22]Bilotta C, Bowling A, Nicolini P, Casè A, Pina G, Rossi SV, et al.: Older People’s Quality of Life (OPQOL) scores and adverse health outcomes at a one-year follow-up. A prospective cohort study on older outpatients living in the community in Italy. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2011, 9:72. BioMed Central Full Text
• [23]Grant RL, Bowling A: Challenges in comparing the quality of life of older people between ethnic groups, and the implications for national well-being indicators: a secondary analysis of two cross-sectional surveys. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2011, 9:109. BioMed Central Full Text