Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

Taylor and Francis Group, Brain Injury, 6(24), p. 833-843

DOI: 10.3109/02699051003789203

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Individualized vs. global assessments of quality of life after head injury and their susceptibility to response shift

Journal article published in 2010 by Hannah Blair, J. T. Lindsay Wilson ORCID, Jo Gouick, Douglas Gentleman
Distributing this paper is prohibited by the publisher
Distributing this paper is prohibited by the publisher

Full text: Unavailable

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

Primary objective: The aim was to compare individualized and global assessments of quality of life (QoL) after traumatic brain injury (TBI) and to investigate perceived changes in QoL. Methods and procedures: The Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life (SEIQoL-DW) and Hadorn's overall 1-10 QoL Scale were administered to 28 participants 1-10 years post-injury together with the GOS-E, HADS and SF-36. Perceived change in quality of life after TBI was investigated by comparing current and retrospective judgements. Main outcome and results: Correlations between the QoL measures confirm validity of the SEIQoL-DW; however, correlations were generally stronger for the simpler 1-10 Scale. Paradoxically, there was little overall change in the mean QoL when current and retrospective judgements were compared; with some participants reporting worse quality of life before injury. A positive change in perceived QoL was associated with better overall functioning. Conclusions: Where an overall rating of QoL is required it seems that Hadorn's 1-10 Scale is a simpler and more direct measure than the SEIQoL-DW. The greater detail provided by the SEIQoL-DW may mean it is of benefit when looking at individual differences. The results suggest that both the SEIQoL-DW and Hadorn's scale are susceptible to response shift (where a person changes the basis on which they evaluate QoL); and this has implications for the interpretation of QoL assessments.