Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen. Je kunt je links eenvoudig registreren. Met deze gegevens kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL. Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met helpdesk@thim.nl.

» Andere revante producten voor THIM studenten en medewerkers.

Registreer

Om ook buiten de locaties van THIM, thuis bijvoorbeeld, van Mijn BSL gebruik te kunnen maken, moet je jezelf eenmalig registreren. Dit kan alleen vanaf een computer op een van de locaties van THIM.

Eenmaal geregistreerd kun je thuis of waar ook ter wereld onbeperkt toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Login

Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in:

01-06-2015

Evaluating quality of life and response shift from a couple-based perspective: a study among patients with colorectal cancer and their partners

Auteurs: Marjan J. Traa, Johan Braeken, Jolanda De Vries, Jan A. Roukema, Ricardo G. Orsini, Brenda L. Den Oudsten

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 6/2015

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Objectives

To examine (1) measurement invariance of quality of life (QoL) domains over time for patients with colorectal cancer and partners (i.e., response shift—recalibration, reprioritization, and reconceptualization), (2) between dyad-member measurement invariance and (3) QoL trajectories.

Methods

Participants completed the WHOQOL-Bref preoperative (Time-0) and 3 (Time-1) and 6 months (Time-2) postoperative. A stepwise procedure, using nested factor models, examined the viability of restricting specific model parameters to be equal across measurements and between dyad members.

Findings

No reconceptualization and reprioritization was detected, but indications for recalibration were present. Therefore, comparisons were restricted to group-level statistics at factor level. For patients, a decrease in the Physical Health domain occurred at Time-1 (p < 0.001), with partial recovery to baseline at Time-2 (p = 0.055). For partners, factor means in this domain remained constant (p’s > 0.05) and were at each time point higher than patients’ factor means (p’s < 0.05). Patients’ and partners’ Psychological Health decreased at Time-1 (p’s < 0.05), with stabilization at Time-2 (p’s > 0.05). Patients and partners’ factor means were comparable (p’s > 0.05). Patients and partners’ Social Relationship factor means decreased at Time-1 (p’s < 0.05), which decreased further for patients (p = 0.011) but stabilized for partners (p = 0.214). Partners’ factor means were only lower than patients’ factor means at Time-1. A similar decrease in the Environmental domain factor means occurred for both patients and partners at Time-1 (p’s < 0.05), with stabilization at Time-2 (p’s > 0.05).

Conclusion

Since both patients and partners are affected by the patients’ disease and treatment, we recommend that attention is paid to the couple instead of solely the patient.
vorige artikel Girls’ quality of life prior to detention in relation to psychiatric disorders, trauma exposure and socioeconomic status
volgende artikel The effects of response option order and question order on self-rated health
Literatuur
1.
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.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Schwartz, C. E., & Sprangers, M. A. (1999). Methodological approaches for assessing response shift in longitudinal health-related quality-of-life research. Social Science and Medicine, 48(11), 1531–1548.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Schwartz, C. E., Bode, R., Repucci, N., Becker, J., Sprangers, M. A., & Fayers, P. M. (2006). The clinical significance of adaptation to changing health: A meta-analysis of response shift. Quality of Life Research, 15(9), 1533–1550.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Sprangers, M. A. (2010). Disregarding clinical trial-based patient-reported outcomes is unwarranted: Five advances to substantiate the scientific stringency of quality-of-life measurement. Acta Oncologica, 49(2), 155–163.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Neuman, H. B., Park, J., Fuzesi, S., & Temple, L. K. (2012). Rectal cancer patients’ quality of life with a temporary stoma: Shifting perspectives. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, 55(11), 1117–1124.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Bernhard, J., Hurny, C., Maibach, R., Herrmann, R., & Laffer, U. (1999). Quality of life as subjective experience: Reframing of perception in patients with colon cancer undergoing radical resection with or without adjuvant chemotherapy. Swiss group for clinical cancer research (sakk). Annals of Oncology, 10(7), 775–782.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Ito, N., Ishiguro, M., Tanaka, M., Tokunaga, K., Sugihara, K., & Kazuma, K. (2000). Response shift in quality-of-life assessment in patients undergoing curative surgery with permanent colostoma. Gastroenterology Nursing, 33(6), 408–412.CrossRef
8.
9.
Schwartz, C. E., Sprangers, M. A. G., Carey, A., & Reed, G. (2004). Exploring response shift in longitudinal data. Psychology and Health, 19(1), 51–69.CrossRef
10.
11.
Sangha, O., Stucki, G., Liang, M. H., Fossel, A. H., & Katz, J. N. (2003). The self-administered comorbidity questionnaire: A new method to assess comorbidity for clinical and health services research. Arthritis Rheum, 49(2), 156–163.PubMedCrossRef
12.
The WHOQOL group. (1998). Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment. Psychological medicine, 28(3), 551–558.CrossRef
13.
Skevington, S. M., Lotfy, M., & O’Connell, K. A. (2004). The World Health Organization’s WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: Psychometric properties and results of the international field trial. A report from the WHOQOL group. Quality of Life Research, 13(2), 299–310.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Trompenaars, F. J., Masthoff, E. D., Van Heck, G. L., Hodiamont, P. P., & De Vries, J. (2005). Content validity, construct validity, and reliability of the WHOQOL-BREF in a population of Dutch adult psychiatric outpatients. Quality of Life Research, 14(1), 151–160.PubMedCrossRef
15.
van Esch, L., Den Oudsten, B. L., & De Vries, J. (2011). The World Health Organization quality of life instrument-short form (WHOQOL-BREF) in women with breast problems. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 11(1), 5–22.
16.
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.CrossRef
17.
Millsap, R. E. (2011). Statistical approaches to measurement invariance. New York: Routledge.
18.
Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70.CrossRef
19.
Schwartz, C. E., Merriman, M. P., Reed, G. W., & Hammes, B. J. (2004). Measuring patient treatment preferences in end-of-life care research: Applications for advance care planning interventions and response shift research. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 7(2), 233–245.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Westfall, P. H. (2014). Kurtosis as Peakedness, 1905–2014. R.I.P. The American Statistician, 68(3), 191–195.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Curran, P. J., West, S. G., & Finch, J. F. (1996). The robustness of test statistics to nonnormality and specification error in confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 1(1), 16–29.CrossRef
22.
Cheung, G. W., & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9(2), 233–255.CrossRef
23.
Sclove, L. S. (1987). Application of model-selection criteria to some problems in multivariate analysis. Psychometrika, 52, 333–343.CrossRef
24.
Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J., & Muthén, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456–466.CrossRef
25.
Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.
26.
Oort, F. J., Visser, M. R., & Sprangers, M. A. (2005). An application of structural equation modeling to detect response shifts and true change in quality of life data from cancer patients undergoing invasive surgery. Quality of Life Research, 14(3), 599–609.PubMedCrossRef
27.
Chan, C. S., Rhodes, J. E., Howard, W. J., Lowe, S. R., Schwartz, S. E., & Herrera, C. (2013). Pathways of influence in school-based mentoring: The mediating role of parent and teacher relationships. Journal of School Psychology, 51(1), 129–142.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
28.
Schwartz, C. E., Feinberg, R. G., Jilinskaia, E., & Applegate, J. C. (1999). An evaluation of a psychosocial intervention for survivors of childhood cancer: Paradoxical effects of response shift over time. Psychooncology, 8(4), 344–354.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Schwartz, C. E., Wheeler, H. B., Hammes, B., Basque, N., Edmunds, J., Reed, G., et al. (2002). Group UME-o-LW. Early intervention in planning end-of-life care with ambulatory geriatric patients: Results of a pilot trial. Archives of Internal Medicine, 162(14), 1611–1618.PubMedCrossRef
30.
Schwartz, C. E., Sajobi, T. T., Lix, L. M., Quaranto, B. R., & Finkelstein, J. A. (2013). Changing values, changing outcomes: The influence of reprioritization response shift on outcome assessment after spine surgery. Quality of Life Research, 22(9), 2255–2264.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Barclay-Goddard, R., Lix, L. M., Tate, R., Weinberg, L., & Mayo, N. E. (2011). Health-related quality of life after stroke: Does response shift occur in self-perceived physical function? Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 92(11), 1762–1769.PubMedCrossRef
32.
33.
Van der Steeg, A. F., De Vries, J., & Roukema, J. A. (2004). Quality of life and health status in breast carcinoma. European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 30(10), 1051–1057.PubMedCrossRef
34.
(1998). The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): Development and general psychometric properties. Social Science Medicine, 46(12), 1569–1585.
Metagegevens
Titel
Evaluating quality of life and response shift from a couple-based perspective: a study among patients with colorectal cancer and their partners
Auteurs
Marjan J. Traa
Johan Braeken
Jolanda De Vries
Jan A. Roukema
Ricardo G. Orsini
Brenda L. Den Oudsten
Publicatiedatum
01-06-2015
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 6/2015
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-014-0872-8

Andere artikelen Uitgave 6/2015

Thank you to Dennis Revicki

  • Acknowledgement

Measurement properties of the 13-item sense of coherence scale using Rasch analysis

Anxiety and worry when coping with cancer treatment: agreement between patient and proxy responses

Psychometric assessment of health-related quality of life and symptom experience in HIV patients treated with antiretroviral therapy

Reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the short form of the Dentine Hypersensitivity Experience Questionnaire (DHEQ-15)

  • Brief Communication

The Dutch Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI): a reliability and validation study

  • Brief Communication