Evaluation of thePatient Generated Indexas a measure of quality-of-life in people with severe traumatic brain injury

The Patient Generated Index (PGI) as an early-warning system for predicting brain health challenges: a prospective cohort study for people living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)

PURPOSE

In research people are often asked to fill out questionnaires about their health and functioning and some of the questions refer to serious health concerns. Typically, these concerns are not identified until the statistician analyses the data. An alternative is to use an individualized measure, the Patient Generated Index (PGI) where people are asked to self-nominate areas of concern which can then be dealt with in real-time. This study estimates the extent to which self-nominated areas of concern related to mood, anxiety and cognition predict the presence or occurrence of brain health outcomes such as depression, anxiety, psychological distress, or cognitive impairment among people aging with HIV at study entry and for successive assessments over 27 months.

METHODS

The data comes from participants enrolled in the Positive Brain Health Now (+ BHN) cohort (n = 856). We analyzed the self-nominated areas that participants wrote on the PGI and classified them into seven sentiment groups according to the type of sentiment expressed: emotional, interpersonal, anxiety, depressogenic, somatic, cognitive and positive sentiments. Tokenization was used to convert qualitative data into quantifiable tokens. A longitudinal design was used to link these sentiment groups to the presence or emergence of brain health outcomes as assessed using standardized measures of these constructs: the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), the Mental Health Index (MHI) of the RAND-36, the Communicating Cognitive Concerns Questionnaire (C3Q) and the Brief Cognitive Ability Measure (B-CAM). Logistic regressions were used to estimate the goodness of fit of each model using the c-statistic.

RESULTS

Emotional sentiments predicted all of the brain health outcomes at all visits with adjusted odds ratios (OR) ranging from 1.61 to 2.00 and c-statistics > 0.73 (good to excellent prediction). Nominating an anxiety sentiment was specific to predicting anxiety and psychological distress (OR 1.65 & 1.52); nominating a cognitive concern was specific to predicting self-reported cognitive ability (OR 4.78). Positive sentiments were predictive of good cognitive function (OR 0.36) and protective of depressive symptoms (OR 0.55).

CONCLUSIONS

This study indicates the value of using this semi-qualitative approach as an early-warning system in predicting brain health outcomes.

Measuring quality of life and identifying what is important to Jordanian living with multiple sclerosis using the Arabic version of the patient-generated index

BACKGROUND

Patient-generated index (PGI) is one of the individualized measures used to measure the quality of life (QOL) in people with different chronic conditions including multiple sclerosis (MS). However, the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the PGI have not been fully established in Jordanian living with MS. Therefore, the objective of this study is to identify what matters to Jordanian living with MS and to contribute evidence toward the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the PGI.

METHODS

A total of 75 participants with MS completed three QOL measures; PGI, the patient determined disease steps (PDDS), and EQ-5D. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare the total score of three QOL measures. Bland-Altman plot and Spearman's correlation coefficient were used to study the relationships and differences between the PGI and the other study measures (PDDS and EQ-5D).

RESULTS

Only 66 (88%) of the participants were able to complete the PGI. Overall, 36 areas of QOL concern were nominated by the participants using the PGI with the top three areas were emotional function (47%), involuntary movement reaction functions (45.5%), and walking (44 %). The average global score of the PGI was lower (34 ± 22) than the global score of the EQ-5D (69 ± 23), and the PDDS (68 ± 24). PGI had a moderate correlation with EQ-5D and PPDS.

CONCLUSION

The Arabic version of the PGI is a feasible, acceptable, and valid measure among Jordanians with MS. PGI also captures more important areas that contribute to QOL than EQ-5D and PDDS. PGI could improve the decision making and guide healthcare professionals to provide appropriate intervention programs to reduce the burdens from MS disease and improve QOL.

The predictors of proxy- and self-reported quality of life among individuals with acquired brain injury

PURPOSE

Acquired brain injury (ABI) diminishes quality of life (QoL) of affected individuals and their families. Fortunately, new multidimensional instruments such as the calidad de vida en daño cerebral (CAVIDACE) scale are available. However, differences in self- and proxy-reported QoL remain unclear. Therefore, this study examined these differences and identified predictors of QoL among individuals with ABI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This cross-sectional study comprised 393 adults with ABI (men: 60%; M_age = 54.65, SD = 14.51). Self-, family-, and professional-reported QoL were assessed using the CAVIDACE scale. Other personal and social variables were assessed as predictors of QoL.

RESULTS

Professionals had the lowest QoL scores (M = 1.88, SD = 0.45), followed by family members (M = 2.02, SD = 0.44) and individuals with ABI (M = 2.10, SD = 0.43). Significant differences were found for almost all QoL domains, finding the highest correlations between family and professional proxy measures (r = 0.63). Hierarchical regression analysis revealed that sociodemographic, clinical, rehabilitation, personal, and social variables were significant predictors of QoL.

CONCLUSIONS

It is necessary to use both self- and proxy-report measures of QoL. Additionally, the identification of the variables that impact QoL permits us to modify the interventions that are offered to these individuals accordingly.Implications for rehabilitationAcquired brain injury (ABI) causes significant levels of disability and affects several domains of functioning, which in turn can adversely affect quality of life (QoL).QoL is a multidimensional construct that is affected by numerous factors: sociodemographic, clinical, personal, social, etc; and also, with aspects related to the rehabilitation they receive after ABI.Rehabilitation programs should address the different domains of functioning that have been affected by ABI.Based on research findings about the QoL's predictors, modifications could be made in the rehabilitation process; paying special attention to the depressive- and anosognosia process, as well as the importance of promoting social support, community integration, and resilience.

What is quality of life and how do we measure it? Relevance to Parkinson's disease and movement disorders

Health-related quality of life is a patient-reported outcome that complements clinical evaluation and provides information about disease activity and effects of the treatment. The objective of this review is to present the conceptual framework, the measures, and some of their most relevant applications in the field of Parkinson's disease and movement disorders. Health-related quality of life is a subjective, individual, and multidimensional construct, and its main dimensions are physical, mental, and social, besides global perceptions of health and personal domains. Health-related quality of life measurement is carried out by means of questionnaires or scales, ideally self-applied by patients, and has a diversity of important applications for clinical practice, research, and health policy. Movement disorders and Parkinson's disease are complex conditions impacting all components of patients' health-related quality of life. The use of health-related quality of life tools provides important information on a variety of aspects that are important to patients while complementing clinical evaluations. In particular, studies using this kind of assessment can identify and monitor the most important health-related quality of life determinant factors, allowing tailored assistance and prioritized interventions. In addition, maintaining or improving the patients' health-related quality of life is an objective of care for chronic diseases and, therefore, it has to be monitored over time and as an outcome of clinical trials. Several methods are available for the interpretation of the change in scores of health-related quality of life measures, although a definitive agreement on the most appropriate method is yet to be determined. Presently, health-related quality of life assessment is an important outcome for research and management of chronic conditions such as Parkinson's disease and other movement disorders. © 2016 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Impaired self-awareness after traumatic brain injury: inter-rater reliability and factor structure of the Dysexecutive Questionnaire (DEX) in patients, significant others and clinicians

Aims: This study sought to address two questions: (1) what is the inter-rater reliability of the Dysexecutive Questionnaire (DEX) when completed by patients, their significant others, and clinicians; and (2) does the factor structure of the DEX vary for these three groups?

Methods: We obtained DEX ratings for 113 patients with an acquired brain injury from two brain injury services in the UK and two services in Ireland. We gathered data from two groups of raters—“significant others” (DEX-SO) such as partners and close family members and “clinicians” (DEX-C), who were psychologists or rehabilitation physicians working closely with the patient and who were able to provide an opinion about the patient’s level of everyday executive functioning. Intra-class correlation coefficients and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated between each of the three groups (self, significant other, clinician). Principal axis factor (PAF) analyses were also conducted for each of the three groups.

Results: The factor analysis revealed a consistent one-factor model for each of the three groups of raters. However, the inter-rater reliability analyses showed a low level of agreement between the self-ratings and the ratings of the two groups of independent raters. We also found low agreement between the significant others and the clinicians.

Conclusion: Although there was a consistent finding of a single factor solution for each of the three groups, the low level of agreement between significant others and clinicians raises a question about the reliability of the DEX.