Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T04:41:47.099Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quality of Life in Liaison Psychiatry

A Comparison of Patient and Clinician Assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

R. A. Gater ,
P. Kind  and
C. Gudex
R. A. Gater*
Affiliation:
University of Manchester, Withington Hospital, York YO1 5DD
P. Kind
Affiliation:
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York YO1 5DD
C. Gudex
Affiliation:
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York YO1 5DD
*
Dr Gater, Mental Illness Research Unit, University of Manchester, Withington Hospital, West Didsbury, Manchester M20 8LR
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

This exploratory study investigates the performance of the Health Measurement Questionnaire (HMQ), as compared with the Psychiatric Assessment Schedule (PAS) and the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP), and compares self- and observer-completed measures.

Method

A total of 138 medical patients scoring over the screening threshold for probable psychiatric illness completed the HMQ, NHP and PAS, and were rated by a psychiatrist on Rosser disability and distress.

Results

HMQ disability correlated well with NHP and PAS physical health items, while HMQ distress correlated well with the NHP emotional reactions and PAS Index of Definition. There was significant correlation between self-report and psychiatrist ratings, the latter being more sensitive to distress.

Conclusion

The HMQ is a useful measure of generic health status in liaison psychiatry settings.

Type
Papers
Information
The British Journal of Psychiatry , Volume 166 , Issue 4 , April 1995 , pp. 515 - 520
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1995 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Dean, C., Surtees, P. G. & Sashidharan, S. P. (1983) Comparison of research diagnostic systems in an Edinburgh community sample. British Journal of Psychiatry, 142, 247–256.Google Scholar
Goldberg, D. P. & Hillier, V. (1979) A scaled version of the General Health Questionnaire. Psychological Medicine, 9, 139–146.Google Scholar
Gudex, C. & Kind, P. (1988) The QALY Toolkit. University of York Centre for Health Economics: Discussion Paper 38.Google Scholar
Hunt, S. M., McKenna, S. P., McEwen, J., et al (1981) The Nottingham Health Profile: subjective health status and medical consultations. Social Science and Medicine, ISA, 221–229.Google Scholar
Kind, P. & Carr-Hill, R. (1987) The Nottingham Health Profile: a useful tool for epidemiologists? Social Science and Medicine, 25, 905–910.Google Scholar
Kind, P. & Gudex, C. M. (1993) Measuring health status in the community: a comparison of methods. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 48, 86–91.Google Scholar
Metz, C. E., Wang, P. L. & Kronman, H. B. (1984) ROCFIT. Chicago: Department of Radiology and the Franklin McLean Memorial Research Institute, University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Rosser, R. & Kind, P. (1978) A scale of valuations of states of illness: is there a social consensus? International Journal of Epidemiology, 7, 347–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slevin, M. L., Plant, H., Lynch, D., et al (1988) Who should measure quality of life, the doctor or the patient? British Journal of Cancer, 57, 109–112.Google Scholar
Uhlmann, R. F. & Pearlman, R. A. (1991) Perceived quality of life and preferences for life-sustaining treatment in older adults. Archives of Internal Medicines, 151, 495–497.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wing, J. K., Cooper, J. & Sartorius, N. (1974) The Measurement and Classification of Psychiatric Symptoms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.