Challenges in Using Recommended Quality of Life Measures to Assess Fluctuating Health: A Think-Aloud Study to Understand How Recall and Timing of Assessment Influence Patient Responses

Sabina Sanghera (), Axel Walther, Tim J. Peters and Joanna Coast
Additional contact information
Sabina Sanghera: University of Bristol
Axel Walther: University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust
Tim J. Peters: University of Bristol
Joanna Coast: University of Bristol

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 2022, vol. 15, issue 4, No 6, 445-457

Abstract: Abstract Background It can be challenging to measure quality of life to calculate quality-adjusted life-years in recurrent fluctuating health states, as quality of life can constantly change. It is not clear how patients who experience fluctuations complete measures and how assessment timing and recall influence responses. Objective We aimed to understand how patients with fluctuating health complete widely recommended and commonly used measures (EQ-5D-5L, EORTC QLQ-C30 and SF-12) and the extent to which the recall period (‘health today’, ‘past week’ and ‘past 4 weeks’) and timing of assessment influence the way that patients complete these questionnaires. Methods Twenty-four adult patients undergoing chemotherapy for urological, gynaecological or bowel cancers in the UK participated in think-aloud interviews, while completing the measures, completed a pictorial task illustrating how quality of life changed during the chemotherapy cycle and took part in semi-structured interviews. Transcripts were analysed using constant comparison. Results Patients were consistent in describing their quality of life as changing considerably throughout a chemotherapy cycle. The shorter recall period of ‘health today’ does not adequately represent patients’ quality of life because of fluctuations, patients remarked they could give a different answer depending on the timing of assessment, and many struggled to combine the “ups and downs” to answer measures with longer recall (‘past week’ and ‘past 4 weeks’). Across all measures, patients attempted to provide averages, adopt the peak-end rule or focus on the best part of their experience. Patients commonly used more than one approach when completing a given questionnaire as well as across questionnaires. Conclusions Patients who experience recurrent fluctuations in health are unable to provide meaningful responses about their quality of life when completing quality-of-life measures due to the recall period and timing of assessment. The use of such responses to calculate health state values in economic evaluations to inform resource allocation decisions in fluctuating conditions must be questioned.

Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-021-00555-7 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:patien:v:15:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s40271-021-00555-7

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40271

DOI: 10.1007/s40271-021-00555-7

Access Statistics for this article

The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research is currently edited by Christopher I. Carswell

More articles in The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research from Springer, International Academy of Health Preference Research
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().