Evaluating a new methodology for providing individualized feedback in healthcare on quality of life and its importance, using the WHOQOL-BREF in a community population

© 2015, Springer International Publishing Switzerland. Purpose: We conducted an evaluation to find out how a novel quality of life (QoL) intervention containing guided individualized feedback was appraised. The importance of QoL was matched with QoL assessment for each subjective dimension, using graphical feedback. We examined whether this information was acceptable, feasible and valued beyond the clinical context, among the community. Methods: Using a mixed-methods cross-sectional design, the intervention was piloted with 129 participants from communities and registered in primary care. WHOQOL-BREF and WHOQOL Importance scores were graphically matched by dimension. Results were inspected and interpreted with directed guidance to identify good and poor QoL. We report the post-intervention evaluation of feedback, including qualitative themes. Follow-up interviews among those expecting feedback to be helpful explored potential self-management and healthcare uses. Results: After feedback, 65% reported changes in thoughts and perceptions of QoL, often describing insights as self-affirming. Goals or expectations changed for 34%, and motivation to change was reported. Over 50% evaluated the feedback as helpful in the short term or for the future. Follow-up interviews endorsed the value of the feedback and its usefulness in sharing with a healthcare professional (92%), suggesting it would facilitate professionals’ understandings of patients and enable health advice to be targeted. Conclusions: The benefits of using this novel feedback can be extended to the general population, as directed guidance aids interpretation, thereby saving health service costs. This complex pilot intervention needs testing in a blinded fully randomized controlled trial. Beyond independent self-management, graphs could be used during clinical decision-making

Qualities of life, educational level and human development: an international investigation of health

INTRODUCTION AND METHODS: This study investigated the relationship between health-related quality of life (QoL), educational level and culture, using a high quality cross-cultural generic measure (WHOQOL-BREF) containing 25 international dimensions organised in physical, psychological, social and environmental domains. RESULTS: Cross-cultural data from 9,404 sick and well adults in 13 countries showed that environmental QoL increased positively and sequentially from no education to tertiary education. The other three domains increased only up to secondary school level. These MANCOVA results were significantly influenced by health status, age, culture and economic development level. More positive feelings, less dependence on medication and treatment, better perceptions of financial resources, physical environment, and opportunities for information and skills, represent adult QoL advantages to those who received tertiary education compared with secondary schooling. Developing countries reported poorer environmental, psychological and physical QoL than developed countries, although social QoL was good, and no different for the two development bands. Only psychological QoL distinguished between every educational level, in developing countries. Increased positive feelings serve to link better mental health with more education. Across each domain, secondary and tertiary education was associated with better QoL in developing countries. CONCLUSION: The results support a QoL case for universal secondary education on which better health and health care may be built.</p

Using guided individualised feedback to review self-reported quality of life in health and its importance

© 2014 Taylor & Francis. This pilot study investigated the effects of providing guided, individualised feedback on subjective quality of life (QoL), using results from the multidimensional WHOQOL-BREF profile. Participants (n=129; 85 chronically ill) were recruited in the community, and primary care. They were randomised to receive written or verbal guidance on interpreting a new graphical summary profile, which simultaneously presented (a) their individual self-ratings of QoL and (b) the importance attributed to each QoL dimension. Before and after feedback, participants completed health status, subjective QoL, QoL Importance, goal-oriented QoL and mood measures. Receiving individualised feedback was associated with increased psychological QoL, with modest effect size. No effects were found for physical, social or environmental QoL or QoL importance, health status, mood or goal-oriented QoL. There were no differences between modes of delivering guidance, indicating equal effectiveness. Chronic illness participants reported poorer QoL, moved more slowly towards their QoL goals, and had larger differences between core QoL and QoL Importance than healthy participants. Guided individualised empirical feedback about QoL judgements could be used to promote psychological well-being. Although professional interpretation of feedback is unnecessary, if shared, patients’ profiled WHOQOL information could support self-monitoring, self-management and clinical decision-making