Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
SLX-Digitalkonferenz: Zukunftswerkstatt 2024

Mehr Umsatz mit Top-Kontakten

Am 7. Mai erfahren Sie, wie Vertriebsteams Leadgenerierung, Leadnurturing und Leadstrategien effizient steuern können.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Quality of Life Research
Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research 6/2016

20.11.2015

Validation of a new patient-reported outcome instrument of health-related quality of life specific to patients with alcohol use disorder: the Alcohol Quality of Life Scale (AQoLS)

verfasst von: A. Luquiens, D. Whalley, P. Laramée, B. Falissard, N. Kostogianni, J. Rehm, J. Manthey, F. Paille, H. J. Aubin

Erschienen in: Quality of Life Research | Ausgabe 6/2016

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Purpose

The Alcohol Quality of Life Scale (AQoLS) is a new patient-reported outcome 34-item questionnaire measuring health-related quality of life (HRQOL), specific to patients with an alcohol use disorder, developed from the patients’ perspective. This is the first report establishing evidence in support of measurement reliability and validity of the AQoLS.

Methods

A total of 285 randomly selected patients receiving interventions for alcohol use disorder in addiction specialised care settings in France were included in the study (response rate 80.1 %). Exploratory factor analysis was conducted to evaluate the hypothesised-during-development-stage dimensional structure of the AQoLS. Internal consistency of the total score and the dimensions subscores were assessed through Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. Construct validity was tested through correlations with the Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) and EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D).

Results

Exploratory analysis indicated seven observed dimensions which differed slightly from the 7 dimensions defined a priori in the framework hypothesised during the scale development: activities, relationships, living conditions, negative emotions, self-esteem, control and sleep. A major common factor allows the summing of the 34 items to obtain a total score. All the 34 items were acceptable. Cronbach’s alpha for the AQoLS total score was 0.96 and ranged from 0.8 to 0.9 for the dimensions subscores. Negative correlations between AQoLS and all dimensions of the SF-36, but general health and positive correlations between AQoLS and all items of the EQ-5D were shown. As expected, the correlations were mostly moderate in magnitude, low with scores referring to physical areas and the highest with the SF-36 MSC.

Conclusion

This study provides evidence of the measure’s psychometric properties in terms of construct validity and internal consistency. The “control” and “self-esteem” dimensions are of particular interest as these concepts are not captured in existing HRQOL. Further longitudinal validation of the scale is necessary to assess sensitivity to change.
Vorheriger Artikel Obesity, metabolic abnormality, and health-related quality of life by gender: a cross-sectional study in Korean adults
Nächster Artikel Using the Three-Step Test Interview to understand how patients perceive the St. George’s Respiratory Questionnaire for COPD patients (SGRQ-C)

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Literatur
1.
Kohn, R., et al. (2004). The treatment gap in mental health care. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 82(11), 858–866.PubMedPubMedCentral
2.
SAMHSA. (2012). Results from the 2011 National survey on drug use and health: Mental health findings. In NSDUH Series H-45. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality.
3.
EMA. (2010). Guideline on the development of medicinal products for the treatment of alcohol dependence. European Medicines Agency.
4.
Rehm, J., & Roerecke, M. (2013). Reduction of drinking in problem drinkers and all-cause mortality. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 48(4), 509–513.CrossRefPubMed
5.
EMA-CHMP. (2012). Selincro Assessment report.
6.
EuropeanMedicinesAgency. (2013). Selincro (nalmefene): EU summary of product characteristics.
7.
Luquiens, A., & Aubin, H. J. (2014). Patient preferences and perspectives regarding reducing alcohol consumption: Role of nalmefene. Patient Prefer Adherence, 8, 1347–1352.PubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Sobell, L. C., et al. (2003). Assessing drinking outcomes in alcohol treatment efficacy studies: Selecting a yardstick of success. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research, 27(10), 1661–1666.CrossRefPubMed
9.
FDA. (2015). Alcoholism: Developing drugs for treatment guidance for industry draft guidance. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER).
10.
Robinson, S. M., et al. (2014). Alcohol and drug treatment outcome studies: New methodological review (2005–2010) and comparison with past reviews. Addictive Behaviors, 39(1), 39–47.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Miller, W.R., & Longabaugh, R. The drinker inventory of consequences (DrInC) An instrument for assessing adverse consequences of alcohol abuse. Test Manual. In Project MATCH Monograph Series. 1995, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
12.
Tiffany, S. T., Carter, B. L., & Singleton, E. G. (2000). Challenges in the manipulation, assessment and interpretation of craving relevant variables. Addiction, 95(Suppl 2), S177–S187.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Donovan, D., et al. (2005). Quality of life as an outcome measure in alcoholism treatment research. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 15, 119–139. (discussion 92–93).CrossRef
14.
Zubaran, C., & Foresti, K. (2009). Quality of life and substance use: Concepts and recent tendencies. Current Opinion in Psychiatry, 22(3), 281–286.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Drummond, M. F., et al. (2005). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16.
Raistrick, D., Heather, N., & Godfrey, C. (2006). Review of the effectiveness of treatment for alcohol problems: NHS, National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse. NHS, National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse.
17.
Leplege, A. (2011). Measurements of quality of life, construction and validation of an instrument. Soins, 759, 35–37.PubMed
18.
McHorney, C. A., Ware, J. E, Jr, & Raczek, A. E. (1993). The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Medical Care, 31(3), 247–263.CrossRefPubMed
19.
EuroQolGroup. (1990). EuroQol—A new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy, 16, 199–208.CrossRef
20.
Luquiens, A., et al. (2012). Quality of life among alcohol-dependent patients: How satisfactory are the available instruments? A systematic review. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 125(3), 192–202.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Jeanrenaud, C., et al. (2003). Le coût social de l’abus d’alcool en Suisse. Institut de recherches économiques et régionales—Université de Neuchatel.
22.
Luquiens, A., et al. (2012). Development of a patient reported outcome measure for alcohol use disorder, in ISBRA. Japan: Sapporo.
23.
FDA. (2009). Guidance for industry. Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims.
24.
Luquiens, A., et al. (2014). Development of the Alcohol Quality of Life Scale (AQoLS): A new patient-reported outcome measure to assess health-related quality of life in alcohol use disorder. Quality of Life Research, 24(6), 1471–1481.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Rehm, J., et al. (2015). People with alcohol use disorders in specialized care in eight different European countries. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 50(3), 310–318.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Rehm, J., et al. (2015). General practitioners recognizing alcohol dependence: A large cross-sectional study in 6 European countries. The Annals of Family Medicine, 13(1), 28–32.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Bush, K., et al. (1998). The AUDIT alcohol consumption questions (AUDIT-C): An effective brief screening test for problem drinking. Ambulatory Care Quality Improvement Project (ACQUIP). Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test. Archives of Internal Medicine, 158(16), 1789–1795.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Bradley, K. A., et al. (2003). Two brief alcohol-screening tests from the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): Validation in a female Veterans Affairs patient population. Archives of Internal Medicine, 163(7), 821–829.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Ware, J. E, Jr, & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30(6), 473–483.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Daeppen, J. B., et al. (1998). MOS-SF-36 in evaluating health-related quality of life in alcohol-dependent patients. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 24(4), 685–694.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Gunther, O., et al. (2007). The EQ-5D in alcohol dependent patients: Relationships among health-related quality of life, psychopathology and social functioning. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 86(2–3), 253–264.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Mokkink, L. B., et al. (2012). COSMIN checklist manual. Amsterdam: EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research.
33.
Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree plot test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1(2), 245–276.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., & Cairney, J. (2014). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
35.
Gabbe, B. J., et al. (2015). Level of agreement between patient-reported EQ-5D responses and EQ-5D responses mapped from the SF-12 in an injury population. Population Health Metrics, 13, 14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
36.
Rouquette, A., & Falissard, B. (2011). Sample size requirements for the internal validation of psychiatric scales. International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, 20(4), 235–249.CrossRefPubMed
37.
De Vet, H., et al. (2011). Measurement in medicine: A practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
38.
Terwee, C. B., et al. (2011). Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: A scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Quality of Life Research, 21(4), 651–657.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Volkow, N. D., & Baler, R. D. (2014). Addiction science: Uncovering neurobiological complexity. Neuropharmacology, 76, 235–249.CrossRefPubMed
40.
Volkow, N. D., et al. (2010). Cognitive control of drug craving inhibits brain reward regions in cocaine abusers. Neuroimage, 49(3), 2536–2543.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
41.
Piazza, P. V., & Deroche-Gamonet, V. (2013). A multistep general theory of transition to addiction. Psychopharmacology (Berl), 229(3), 387–413.CrossRef
42.
Noel, X., Brevers, D., & Bechara, A. (2013). A neurocognitive approach to understanding the neurobiology of addiction. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 23(4), 632–638.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
43.
Muraven, M., & Shmueli, D. (2006). The self-control costs of fighting the temptation to drink. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 20(2), 154–160.CrossRefPubMed
44.
Wilcox, C. E., et al. (2014). Cognitive control in alcohol use disorder: Deficits and clinical relevance. Reviews in the Neurosciences, 25(1), 1–24.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
45.
Donovan, D. M., & O’Leary, M. R. (1978). The Drinking-Related Locus of Control Scale. Reliability, factor structure and validity. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 39(5), 759–784.CrossRefPubMed
46.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self image. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
47.
48.
Hibbert, L. J., & Best, D. W. (2011). Assessing recovery and functioning in former problem drinkers at different stages of their recovery journeys. Drug and Alcohol Review, 30(1), 12–20.CrossRefPubMed
49.
Chubon, R. (1999). Manual for the life situation survey. Department of neuropsychiatry and behaviorial Science, University of South Carolina.
50.
Foster, J. H., Marshall, E. J., & Peters, T. J. (2000). Application of a quality of life measure, the life situation survey (LSS), to alcohol-dependent subjects in relapse and remission. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research, 24(11), 1687–1692.CrossRefPubMed
51.
Ravens-Sieberer, U., & Bullinger, M. (1998). Assessing health-related quality of life in chronically ill children with the German KINDL: First psychometric and content analytical results. Quality of Life Research, 7(5), 399–407.CrossRefPubMed
52.
Ugochukwu, C., et al. (2013). The importance of quality of life in patients with alcohol abuse and dependence. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 21(1), 1–17.CrossRefPubMed
53.
Wallhed Finn, S., Bakshi, A. S., & Andreasson, S. (2014). Alcohol consumption, dependence, and treatment barriers: Perceptions among nontreatment seekers with alcohol dependence. Substance Use & Misuse, 49(6), 762–769.CrossRef
54.
Hsu, D.T., et al. (2015). It still hurts: Altered endogenous opioid activity in the brain during social rejection and acceptance in major depressive disorder. Mol Psychiatry.
55.
Schwartz, C. E., et al. (2013). Guidelines for secondary analysis in search of response shift. Quality of Life Research, 22(10), 2663–2673.CrossRefPubMed
56.
Sprangers, M. A., & Schwartz, C. E. (1999). Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: A theoretical model. Social Science and Medicine, 48(11), 1507–1515.CrossRefPubMed
57.
Whalley, D., et al. (2014). Cultural adaptation of the Alcohol Quality of Life Scale for use in Japan, China, and Korea. In International Society For Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 17th Annual European Congress. Amsterdam.
Metadaten
Titel
Validation of a new patient-reported outcome instrument of health-related quality of life specific to patients with alcohol use disorder: the Alcohol Quality of Life Scale (AQoLS)
verfasst von
A. Luquiens
D. Whalley
P. Laramée
B. Falissard
N. Kostogianni
J. Rehm
J. Manthey
F. Paille
H. J. Aubin
Publikationsdatum
20.11.2015
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Quality of Life Research / Ausgabe 6/2016
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1190-5

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 6/2016

Quality of Life Research 6/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Review

Systematic review of interventions addressing social isolation and depression in aged care clients

Special Section: Response Shift Effects at Item Level (by invitation only)

The Guttman errors as a tool for response shift detection at subgroup and item levels

OriginalPaper

Quality of life across medical conditions and psychological factors: implications for population health management

OriginalPaper

Validity, responsiveness, and minimal clinically important difference of EQ-5D-5L in stroke patients undergoing rehabilitation

Review

Quality of life among patients after bilateral prophylactic mastectomy: a systematic review of patient-reported outcomes

Special Section: Response Shift Effects at Item Level (by invitation only)

Using a retrospective pretest instead of a conventional pretest is replacing biases: a qualitative study of cognitive processes underlying responses to thentest items