Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKelly, C
dc.contributor.authorHulme, C
dc.contributor.authorGraham, L
dc.contributor.authorEllwood, A
dc.contributor.authorPatel, I
dc.contributor.authorCundill, B
dc.contributor.authorFarrin, A
dc.contributor.authorGoodwin, M
dc.contributor.authorHull, K
dc.contributor.authorFisher, J
dc.contributor.authorForster, A
dc.date.accessioned2021-04-13T14:38:49Z
dc.date.issued2021-04-05
dc.description.abstractObjectives to compare care staff proxies with care home residents’ self-assessment of their health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Methods we assessed the degree of inter-rater reliability between residents and care staff proxies for the EQ-5D-5L index, domains and EQ Visual Analogue Scale at baseline, 3 months and 6 months, collected as part of the PATCH trial. We calculated kappa scores. Interpreted as <0 no agreement, 0–0.2 slight, 0.21–0.60 fair to moderate and >0.6 substantial to almost perfect agreement. Qualitative interviews with care staff and researchers explored the challenges of completing these questions. Results over 50% of the HRQoL data from residents was missing at baseline compared with a 100% completion rate by care staff proxies. A fair-to-moderate level of agreement was found for the EQ-5D-5L index. A higher level of agreement was achieved for the EQ-5D-5L domains of mobility and pain. Resident ‘non-completers’ were more likely to: be older, have stayed a longer duration in the care home, have lower Barthel Index and Physical Activity and Mobility in Residential Care (PAM-RC) scores, a greater number of co-morbidities and have joined the trial through consultee agreement. Interviews with staff and researchers indicated that it was easier to rate residents’ mobility levels than other domains, but in general it was difficult to obtain data from residents or to make an accurate proxy judgement for those with dementia. Conclusions whilst assessing HRQoL by care staff proxy completion provides a more complete dataset, uncertainty remains as to how representative these values are for different groups of residents within care homes.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipChartered Society of Physiotherapy Charitable Trusten_GB
dc.identifier.citationPublished online 5 April 2021en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/ageing/afab053
dc.identifier.grantnumberOPA/14/03en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/125349
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherOxford University Press (OUP) / British Geriatrics Societyen_GB
dc.rights© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.comen_GB
dc.subjectcare homesen_GB
dc.subjectcare staffen_GB
dc.subjectcost effectivenessen_GB
dc.subjecthealth-related quality of lifeen_GB
dc.subjectolder peopleen_GB
dc.subjectproxy measuresen_GB
dc.titleInter-rater reliability of care home staff’s proxy judgements with residents’ assessments of their own health-related quality of life: an analysis of the PATCH trial EQ-5D dataen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2021-04-13T14:38:49Z
dc.identifier.issn0002-0729
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Oxford University Press via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.identifier.journalAge and Ageingen_GB
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/en_GB
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2021-04-05
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2021-04-13T14:37:11Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2021-04-13T14:38:54Z
refterms.panelAen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com