Clinical Rehabilitation

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McKevitt, C
Right arrow Articles by Wolfe, C D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McKevitt, C
Right arrow Articles by Wolfe, C D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Clinical Rehabilitation, Vol. 17, No. 8, 865-870 (2003)
DOI: 10.1191/0269215503cr690oa
© 2003 SAGE Publications

Defining and using quality of life: a survey of health care professionals

C McKevitt

J Redfern

V La-Placa

C DA Wolfe

Department of Public Health Sciences, King's College London, UK

Objective: ‘Quality of life’ is an important but poorly defined outcome in health and health care research. We sought to identify stroke professionals' definitions of quality of life and views of the purpose of its assessment.

Design: Using issues identified during in-depth interviews with stroke care professionals, we designed a postal survey questionnaire. Participants were asked to define quality of life, identify the purposes of assessing it and report experiences of measuring patient quality of life. Comparisons between professional groups were analysed using chi-squared tests of significance.

Subjects: Care of the elderly physicians, physiotherapists and occupational therapists in the UK.

Results: Of 2793 questionnaires distributed, 1572 were returned (56% response rate). Quality of life was defined in terms of ‘happiness’ by 72%; 25% included social well-being; 25% included physical abilities. Most (91%) identified ‘asking patients’ as an effective way to assess quality of life; 40% using standardized measures. Half those who reported using quality of life measures experienced difficulties, including being unsure about which measure to use and concerns about validity.

Conclusions: The idea of quality of life as happiness dominated responders' definitions. We argue that the term may be used in both a technical sense (an outcome) and in a broad colloquial sense, without necessarily distinguishing between the two. Clarification of the concept and its uses is required if recent calls to introduce quality of life assessment in clinical care are to be feasible.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?