Elsevier

Mayo Clinic Proceedings

Volume 82, Issue 10, October 2007, Pages 1214-1228
Mayo Clinic Proceedings

SPECIAL ARTICLE
Applying Quality-of-Life Data Formally and Systematically Into Clinical Practice

https://doi.org/10.4065/82.10.1214Get rights and content

The systematic integration of quality-of-life (QOL) assessment into the clinical setting, although deemed important, infrequently occurs. Barriers include the need for a practical approach perceived as useful and efficient by patients and clinicians and the inability of clinicians to readily identify the value of integrating QOL assessments into the clinical setting. We discuss the use of QOL data in patient care and review approaches used to integrate QOL assessment into the clinical setting. Additionally, we highlight select QOL measures that have been successfully applied in the clinical setting. These measures have been shown to identify key QOL issues, improve patient-clinician communications, and improve and enhance patient care. However, the work done to date requires continued development. Continued research is needed that provides information about benefits and addresses limitations of current approaches.

Section snippets

CLINICAL SCENARIO

Mrs James, a 62-year-old woman with a 5-year history of renal cell carcinoma treated with nephrectomy, presented for a second opinion regarding lung nodules. The nodules were first seen 3 months ago, at which time observation was chosen as the course of management. Her other medical history consisted of hereditary peripheral neuropathy and ataxia, hypothyroidism, osteoarthritis, and hypertension. Examining her history, the physician assumed that her quality of life (QOL) was likely impaired.

USING QOL DATA IN THE TREATMENT OF EACH PATIENT

Growing evidence suggests that optimizing processes and outcomes of care depends on implementing multicomponent interventions that change the prevailing system of care.3, 4, 5 The Institute of Medicine's report,6 Crossing the Quality Chasm, outlines 6 fundamental components of optimal care for illness: safe, timely, evidence based, efficient, equitable, and patient centered. The core of patient-centered care is the concept of self-management or patients' active and central role in managing

WHAT CLINICIANS NEED TO KNOW TO EFFECTIVELY USE QOL DATA

We begin by reviewing group-level data from published studies that have compared the QOL of one group of patients with those of another. The following section will then focus on individual-level data collected from patients at the time of their visit. For these 2 data sources, we address approaches to communicating QOL information to patients.

COMMUNICATION OF QOL DATA TO PATIENTS FOR THEIR USE

Informative communication approaches provide patients with data about the likelihood that a single aspect of QOL will improve with treatment, the meaningfulness of the QOL improvement in respect to the patient's ability to function, and the importance of the QOL change to the specific person.17 This information can be communicated as the number of symptom-free days, the percentage of persons experiencing improvements of a specified amount, and the time required to experience a minimally

INTEGRATING QOL ASSESSMENT INTO EACH PATIENT'S CARE

Thus far, we have discussed the importance of QOL concerns and the various types of data that are available to help patients make decisions about treatment or to proactively manage their disease such as cancer. This section summarizes studies that have evaluated the effect of QOL data collection on processes and outcome of care. These studies were identified as a result of a systematic search of the literature with MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsychINFO. Additional references were identified through

IMPLEMENTATION INTO PRACTICE: EXAMPLES

Thus far, we have discussed the role of group-level vs individual-level data in the individual patient encounter, different administration modalities for collecting QOL data, and the effects of QOL data collection on processes and outcomes of care. In this section, we present an overview of several QOL instruments that have been used in individual patient encounters and for which group-level data are available. The instruments identified here reflect only a few of the many that are available in

HEALTH DECISION AIDS

Health decision aids facilitate shared and informed decision making by helping patients and clinicians make specific and deliberate health care choices (including the choice for the status quo).77, 78, 79, 80, 81 They do this in part by providing group-level data about the experiences of others in a similar situation. Decision aids are superior to usual care interventions in improving knowledge and realistic expectations of the benefits and harms of various health care options, reducing

FURTHER RESEARCH

In the previous sections we note the importance of QOL data for patient decision making. Several researchers have looked at the process of obtaining QOL information and providing that information to clinicians. We have documentation that computerized approaches are user friendly and are rated favorably by both clinicians and patients. The most frequently measured outcomes in QOL assessment studies were the frequency at which QOL problems were identified and whether communication was enhanced.

CONCLUSION

The routine assessment and use of QOL data in clinical settings are consistent with the Institute of Medicine's recommendation of ensuring patient-centered care for chronic illnesses. Patient-centered care can improve the interaction between patients and clinicians by placing the focus on shared decision making and patient self-management. We provided information on the types of QOL data (group vs individual level) available for aiding in shared decision making and improving patient

REFERENCES (88)

  • EW Hoeper et al.

    The usefulness of screening for mental illness

    Lancet

    (1984)
  • A Johnstone et al.

    Psychiatric screening in general practice: a controlled trial

    Lancet

    (1976)
  • LE Kazis et al.

    Health status reports in the care of patients with rheumatoid arthritis

    J Clin Epidemiol

    (1990)
  • AA Moore et al.

    A randomized trial of office-based screening for common problems in older persons

    Am J Med

    (1997)
  • D Cella et al.

    A guide for clinicians to compare the accuracy and precision of health-related quality-of-life data relative to other clinical measures

    Clin Ther

    (2003)
  • RC Rosen et al.

    The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): a multidimensional scale for assessment of erectile dysfunction

    Urology

    (1997)
  • American Society of Clinical Oncology

    Outcomes of cancer treatment for technology assessment and cancer treatment guidelines

    J Clin Oncol

    (1996)
  • I Tannock

    Treating the patient, not just the cancer [editorial]

    N Engl J Med

    (1987)
  • EH Wagner et al.

    Improving outcomes in chronic illness

    Manag Care Q

    (Spring 1996)
  • T Bodenheimer et al.

    Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness

    JAMA

    (2002)
  • Institute of Medicine, Committee on Quality of Health Care in America

    Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century

    (2001)
  • RE Glasgow et al.

    Self-management aspects of the improving chronic illness care break-through series: implementation with diabetes and heart failure teams

    Ann Behav Med

    (2002)
  • PI Borgen et al.

    Patient regrets after bilateral prophylactic mastectomy

    Ann Surg Oncol

    (1998)
  • MH Frost et al.

    Perceived familial risk for cancer: health concerns and psychosocial adjustment

    J Psychosoc Oncol

    (2000)
  • LJ Fallowfield et al.

    Psychosocial and sexual impact of diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer

    Br Med Bull

    (1991)
  • LR Schover et al.

    Partial mastectomy and breast reconstruction: a comparison of their effects on psychosocial adjustment, body image, and sexuality

    Cancer

    (1995)
  • PA Ganz et al.

    Breast conservation versus mastectomy: is there a difference in psychological adjustment in the year after surgery?

    Cancer

    (1992)
  • LJ Fallowfield et al.

    Psychological outcomes of different treatment policies in women with early breast cancer outside a clinical trial

    BMJ

    (1990)
  • JA Sloan et al.

    Detecting worms, ducks and elephants: a simple approach for defining clinically relevant effects in quality-of-life measures

    J Cancer Integr Med

    (2003)
  • PS Burge et al.

    Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled study of fluticasone propionate in patients with moderate to severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the ISOLDE trial

    BMJ

    (2000)
  • MH Frost et al.

    Long-term satisfaction and psychological and social function following bilateral prophylactic mastectomy

    JAMA

    (2000)
  • M Brundage et al.

    Communicating quality of life information to cancer patients: a study of six presentation formats

    J Clin Oncol

    (2005)
  • J Buxton et al.

    Patients' experiences using a computerized program with a touch-sensitive video monitor for the assessment of health-related quality of life

    Qual Life Res

    (1998)
  • DR Calkins et al.

    Functional disability screening of ambulatory patients: a randomized controlled trial in a hospital-based group practice

    J Gen Intern Med

    (1994)
  • Cella D, Hahn EA, Lai JS, Odon L. Equating quality of life (QOL) assessment across the literacy spectrum [abstract 40]....
  • SB Detmar et al.

    Health-related quality-of-life assessment and patient-physician communication: a randomized controlled trial [published correction appears in JAMA. 2003;289(8):987]

    JAMA

    (2002)
  • C Dowrick

    Does testing for depression influence diagnosis of management by general practitioners?

    Fam Prac

    (1995)
  • M Espallargues et al.

    Provision of feedback on perceived health status to health care professionals: a systematic review of its impact

    Med Care

    (2000)
  • PS German et al.

    Detection and management of mental health problems of older patients by primary care providers

    JAMA

    (1987)
  • J Greenhalgh et al.

    The effectiveness of the use of patient-based measures of health in routine practice in improving the process and outcomes of patient care: a literature review

    J Eval Clin Pract

    (1999)
  • N Hill

    Use of quality-of-life scores in care planning in a hospice setting: a comparative study

    Int J Palliat Nurs

    (2002)
  • PS Kurtin et al.

    Patient-based health status measures in outpatient dialysis: early experiences in developing an outcomes assessment program

    Med Care

    (1992)
  • LS Linn et al.

    Screening of depression in relationship to subsequent patient and physician behavior

    Med Care

    (1982)
  • K Magruder-Habib et al.

    Improving physicians' recognition and treatment of depression in general medical care: results from a randomized clinical trial

    Med Care

    (1990)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text