首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Health Professions >Assessing the quality of life and well-being of older adults with physical and cognitive impairments in a German-speaking setting: A systematic review of validity and utility of assessments / Die Erfassung von Lebensqualit?t und Wohlbefinden ?lterer Mensc
【24h】

Assessing the quality of life and well-being of older adults with physical and cognitive impairments in a German-speaking setting: A systematic review of validity and utility of assessments / Die Erfassung von Lebensqualit?t und Wohlbefinden ?lterer Mensc

机译:评估德语环境中具有身体和认知障碍的老年人的生活质量和福祉:评估的有效性和效用的系统审查/ DIE erfassung von Lebensqualit?T und wohlbefinden?Lterer Mensc

获取原文
       

摘要

Background For health professionals working with older adults with physical and cognitive impairments, improving or maintaining clients’ quality of life and well-being is of crucial importance. The aim of this study was to evaluate validity and utility of assessments of quality of life and well-being in German suitable for this group of clients. Methods In an initial literature search, we identified potentially viable assessments based on existing systematic reviews. We then conducted a systematic literature search in the databases Medline, CINAHL, and PsycINFO using keywords related to validity, utility, client group, and German. Assessments for which sufficient evidence was found were evaluated regarding their validity and utility when used with older adults with physical and cognitive impairments. Results For 14 of 27 initially identified assessments, sufficient evidence was found to evaluate validity and utility with this client group. WHOQOL-BREF, WHOQOL-OLD, WHO-5, EUROHIS-QOL 8, SF-36, SF-12, EQ-5D, NHP, SEIQOL-DW, SWLS, PANAS, DQOL, QOL-AD, and QUALIDEM were evaluated based on 82 studies. Of these, WHOQOL-BREF, WHO-5, SF-36, SF-12, EQ-5D, NHP, QUALIDEM, QOL-AD and DQOL are presented here. Conclusion Assessments differed widely in the way they operationalized quality of life/well-being, use of self-evaluation or evaluation-by-proxy, and amount of available evidence for their validity and utility. On the basis of our results in regard to the assessments’ validity, utility, and appropriateness of operationalization of quality of life/well-being to the client group, three assessments were recommended for use: WHOQOL-BREF for self-evaluation, QUALIDEM for evaluation-by-proxy in case of severe dementia, and EQ-5D for cost-utility analyses.
机译:健康专业人士的背景与老年人合作,具有身体和认知障碍,改善或维持客户的生活质量和福祉至关重要。本研究的目的是评估德国人和福祉质量评估的有效性和效用适合这群客户。方法在初始文献搜索中,我们确定了基于现有系统评论的潜在可行的评估。然后,我们使用与有效性,实用程序,客户组和德语相关的关键字进行数据库Medline,Cinahl和Psycinfo进行系统文献搜索。在与具有身体和认知障碍的老年人一起使用时,对发现有足够证据的评估是对其有效性和效用进行了评估。结果27项最初确定的评估,充分证据评估了此客户组的有效性和公用事业。 WHOQOL-BREF,WHOQOL旧的WHO-5,EUROHIS-QOL 8,SF-36,SF-12,EQ-5D,NHP,SEIQOL-DW,SWL,PANA,DQOL,QOL广告和QUARIDEM被评估在82项研究中。其中,这里给出了WHO-5,SF-36,SF-12,EQ-5D,NHP,Qualidem,QoL-AD和DQOL。结论评估在他们运作的生活质量/福祉,使用自我评估或评估的方式之路不同,以及可用证据的数量,以及其有效性和效用。在我们的结果的基础上,在评估的有效性,效用和对客户组的效果化的效力,效用和适当的基础上,建议使用三项评估:WHOQOL-BREF用于自我评估,资格在严重痴呆症的情况下评估逐个代理,以及成本实用程序分析的EQ-5D。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号