Validation of the Spanish Version of the ICECAP-O for Nursing Home Residents with Dementia

Co-production processes for translation and validation of psychosocial assessments for older adults in aged care

OBJECTIVE

Given the diverse ethnic backgrounds of aged care clients, there is a critical requirement to translate psychosocial assessment tools into various languages to effectively evaluate social engagement and quality of life in older adults receiving aged care services. This study aimed to translate psychosocial tools into Turkish, Korean and Mandarin, the primary languages spoken by clients of an Australian community aged care provider.

METHODS

A co-development approach encompassing forward and backward translations of the Australian Community Participation Questionnaire and ICEpop CAPability measure for Older people tools, along with focus group discussions involving bilingual staff (n = 7) and clients (n = 16), was employed to ensure precision and cultural relevance. Multiple iterations were undertaken until linguistic, conceptual and scaling equivalence was achieved, with recorded sessions transcribed and analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Cultural appropriateness significantly impacted the delivery of questions within the tools, emphasising translation challenges tied to specific queries. These difficulties included the lack of terms for unique places of worship, the use of outdated language (e.g., references to reading newspapers), and varying priorities in social and well-being matters between Western and Eastern/Asian cultures. Staff feedback identified that formal translated tool versions eased administration for culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) clients, enabling them to independently interpret questions, resulting in improved questionnaire completion rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Insights indicate the need for continued efforts in tailoring assessment tools to diverse cultural contexts to ensure accurate and meaningful data collection.

Using EQ-5D for Proxy Assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life in Residential Care Facilities: A Systematic Review of Feasibility and Psychometric Properties

OBJECTIVES

The accurate assessment of Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) in residents of residential care facilities (RCF) necessitates the use of proxy-reported instruments that possess robust psychometric properties. Generally, these instruments are modified versions of self-reported tools, with adjustments made to pronouns and instructions to better suit the respondent. Among such tools, the EQ-5D has emerged as a prominent instrument for evaluating HRQoL within RCF settings. This review aimed to synthesize evidence on psychometric properties of the proxy version of EQ-5D.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Residents in RCF.

METHODS

An extensive search was conducted across 8 databases, covering articles from inception to May 29, 2023. We included a total of 20 articles reporting data that can be used to evaluate psychometric properties of this instrument in RCF. The quality appraisal employed the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist, and data synthesis followed COSMIN methodology.

RESULTS

Most of the included studies were conducted in Europe, with 75% using nursing staff as proxies. Missing data rates were 5% for EQ-5D and 26% for EQ VAS. Evidence of moderate certainty on construct validity of the EQ-5D index was inconsistent, although the EQ VAS showed sufficient construct validity supported by high certainty. EQ-5D index responsiveness evidence was limited, characterized by low certainty and inconsistency. Proxy-resident agreement ranged from poor to moderate, and improved with repeated administration for the "mobility" and "usual activities" dimensions. The lowest agreement was observed when staff served as proxies or the proxy-proxy perspective was adopted.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This review offers an overview of the psychometric properties of EQ-5D as a proxy HRQoL measure in RCF. The suboptimal evidence on psychometric properties of EQ-5D indicated the need for more validation studies and cautious use of the instrument in RCF.

Neurological Health: Not Merely the Absence of Disease: Current Wellbeing Instruments Across the Spectrum of Neurology

OBJECTIVE

Well-being and quality of life can vary independently of disease. Instruments measuring well-being and quality of life are commonly used in neurology, but there has been little investigation into the extent in which they accurately measure wellbeing/quality of life or if they merely reflect a diseased state of an individual.

DESIGN

Systematic searches, thematic analysis and narrative synthesis were undertaken. Individual items from instruments represented in ≥ 5 publications were categorised independently, without prior training, by five neurologists and one well-being researcher, as relating to 'disease-effect' or 'Well-being' with a study-created instrument. Items were additionally categorised into well-being domains.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, EMCARE and PsycINFO from 1990 to 2020 were performed, across the 13 most prevalent neurological diseases.

RESULTS

301 unique instruments were identified. Multiple sclerosis had most unique instruments at 92. SF-36 was used most, in 66 studies. 22 instruments appeared in ≥ 5 publications: 19/22 'well-being' outcome instruments predominantly measured disease effect (Fleiss kappa = .60). Only 1/22 instruments was categorised unanimously as relating to well-being. Instruments predominantly measured mental, physical and activity domains, over social or spiritual.

CONCLUSIONS

Most neurological well-being or quality-of-life instruments predominantly measure disease effect, rather than disease-independent well-being. Instruments differed widely in well-being domains examined.

What does a "good life" mean for people living with dementia? A protocol for a think-aloud study informing the value of care

Introduction

Economic evaluation currently focuses almost exclusively on the maximization of health, using the Quality-Adjusted Life-Year (QALY) framework with instruments such as the EQ-5D, with a limited number of health-focused dimensions providing the assessment of health benefit. This evaluative framework is likely to be insufficient for setting priorities in dementia care because of its exclusive concern with health. Data are also often collected from the perspective of a proxy, limiting the voice of those living with dementia in decision-making. This protocol describes a research project that aims to gather the perspectives of people living with dementia, their insights, and preferences for assessing their quality of life to inform economic evaluation outcome measurement and design with a goal of creating a more robust evidence base for the value of healthcare services. Specifically, this study will elucidate what a "good life" means to people living with dementia and how well instruments currently used in economic evaluation meet this description. This project will further test the acceptability of capability wellbeing instruments as self-report instruments and compare them to generic and dementia-specific preference-based instruments.

Methods and analysis

People living with dementia, diagnosed, or waiting to receive a formal diagnosis and with the capacity to participate in research, will be invited to participate in an hour "think aloud" interview. Participants will be purposefully selected to cover a range of dementia diagnoses, age, and sex, recruited through the integrated care, geriatric, and post-diagnostic clinics at St James' and Tallaght University Hospitals and dementia support groups in the Ireland. During the interview, participants will be invited to reflect on a "good life" and "think aloud" while completing four economic quality of life instruments with a perspective that goes beyond health (AD-5D/QOL-AD, AQOL-4D, ICECAP-O, ICECAP-SCM). An interviewer will then probe areas of difficulty when completing the instruments in a semi-structured way. The analysis will identify the frequency of errors in comprehension, retrieval, judgment, and response from verbatim transcripts. Qualitative data will be analyzed using constant comparison.

Ethics

The St James's Hospital and Tallaght University Hospital Joint Research Ethics Committee approved the study (Approval Date: 11 April 2022).

Comparing the measurement properties of the ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O instruments in ages 50-70: a cross-sectional study on a representative sample of the Hungarian general population

OBJECTIVE

The ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O were validated as capability wellbeing measures of adults aged 18 + and 65 + years, respectively. We aimed to compare their measurement properties in age group 50-70.

METHODS

Data were derived from a cross-sectional survey among a sample representative for the adult Hungarian population. Respondents aged between 50 and 70 filled in both the ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O questionnaires. We assessed and compared feasibility, agreement, discriminatory power, convergent and content validity of the two instruments and explored the determinants of the differences between the two measures.

RESULTS

707 respondents (99.4%) provided full answers to both questionnaires (46.3% women, average age 60.1 years). The instruments showed similar construct and convergent validity and discriminatory power. Pearson-correlations between instrument items were strong (r > 0.5). ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O scores could be calculated from each other with a good confidence (R² = 0.69 and 0.71). ICECAP-O scores (mean 0.87, SD = 0.12) were systematically higher than ICECAP-A scores (0.85, SD = 0.15) in most subgroups. The difference increased with the deterioration of capability and health, and with age. Regression results showed that employment and health status had larger marginal effect on the ICECAP-A than on the ICECAP-O scores, and these effects were larger than the effect of age on both measures.

CONCLUSION

Validity of both instruments was confirmed in the age groups 50-70. Given that employment and health status are important determinants of the differences between the two instruments besides age, the possibility of linking the choice between ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O to these factors should be investigated by further research.

Predictors of quality of life and attitude to ageing in older adults with and without dementia

OBJECTIVES

This study explored the quality of life (QoL) and attitudes to aging in older adults with and without dementia, and ascertained the main factors that predict QoL and attitude to ageing.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study involving 563 community-dwelling adults with (PwD) and without dementia (PwoD) >60 years of age was conducted in three Czech regions. A tools battery including the Quality of Life-Alzheimer's Disease Scale, Geriatric Depression Scale, Patient Dignity Inventory, Attitude to Aging Questionnaire (AAQ), Short Physical Performance Battery, and Barthel Index, were administered.

RESULTS

PwD had worse scores in QoL and AAQ (both p = 0.0001). Less depression (p < 0.001), better sense of dignity (p < 0.05), and lower pain (p < 0.05) in PwoD predicted better scoring for QoL and AAQ. Physical ability in PwoD (p < 0.05), living alone (p < 0.05) and self-sufficiency (p < 0.001) in PwDwere predictors influencing QoL.Age (p < 0.01) in PwoD, gender (p < 0.05) and physical ability (p < 0.001) in PwD influenced AAQ.

CONCLUSIONS

This research is the first study to show that dignity can influence the QoL and attitude to aging in community-dwelling older adults. Our findings suggest that depression and dignity are common predictors of QoL and AAQ in older adults with and without dementia.

Measuring capabilities in health and physical activity promotion: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The capability approach by Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum has gained increasing attention in the field of public health. As it combines individual, social and structural factors and shifts the focus of attention from the actual behavior towards available options for health behaviors that people can actually choose from, it may help advance our understanding of complex health issues.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this article is to identify and describe tools available to measure capabilities within the context of health, with a specific focus on capabilities for health-enhancing physical activity.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic literature review using 11 databases covering scientific journal articles published in English or German between the years 2000 and 2020 with a focus on capabilities for health or physical activity.

RESULTS

We found a total of 51 articles meeting our inclusion criteria. Four articles measured capabilities using qualitative methods, one combined qualitative and quantitative methods, while the rest used quantitative methods. We identified a total 11 different capability questionnaires, all showing moderate to good validity/reliability. Only one questionnaire and one interview-based tool specifically dealt with capabilities for health enhancing physical activity.

CONCLUSION

Although we were able to identify measurement tools for capabilities in health, this review has shown that there is no generic tool available for the measurement across all population- and age-groups, and tools focusing on physical activity are scarce. However, our results can be used as guide for future projects that aim at measuring capabilities.

Single Time-Point Study of the Home Environment and Functionality of Older Adults in Spain

Background: The literature favors discussion on socio-spatial conditions at the macro- (city) and micro- (housing) level that promote healthy aging in place. Objectives: (a) Identify the association between physical and social characteristics of the family home and the functional level and quality of life of older people and (b) provide normative data on adequate/inadequate households based on the Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment (HOME) inventory and the Spanish Informant Questionnaire on Cognitive Decline in the Elderly (S-IQCODE) test. Methods: In total, 79 healthy older adults completed the HOME inventory and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), S-IQCODE, Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K-10) and ICEpop CAPability measure for Older people (ICECAP-O) tests. A regression model, the effect size and the means of the scores of HOME (adequate/inadequate) test and the cognitive level (optimal/normal) were calculated. Results: The regression model discloses that adequate home scores are associated with cognitive level (odds ratio (OR): 0.955, confidence interval (CI)95%: 0.918-0.955); quality of life (OR: 6.542, CI95%: 1.750-24.457), living with other people (OR: 5.753, CI95%: 1.456-22.733) and level of education (OR: 0.252, CI95%: 0.064-0.991). The normative data between HOME and S-IQCODE scores showed a good adjustment (d = 0.70). Conclusion: There is a significant relationship between the physical environment of the home and personal variables (sociodemographic information, quality of life and cognitive functionality). In addition, from this last variable, the normative data of an adequate/inadequate household for an older person have been established.

A qualitative exploration of the content and face validity of preference-based measures within the context of dementia

BACKGROUND

Assessing the cost-effectiveness of interventions for people with dementia, based on cost per quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained, requires that the measures used to derive QALYs are preference-based whilst also being valid, feasible to use, comprehensible and acceptable for people with dementia. The aim of this study was to assess the content and face validity of six preference-based measures (PBMs) within the context of dementia.

METHODS

Qualitative focus groups and interviews were conducted with community-dwelling individuals with mild dementia and carers of people with dementia. After exploring participants' understanding of 'quality of life' (QoL), six PBMs were assessed for content and face validity: two measures assessing health-related QoL (EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D); two covering broader aspects of capability wellbeing and social care-related QoL (ICECAP-O and ASCOT); and two dementia-specific QoL measures (DEMQOL-U and AD-5D). A random mix of one health-related QoL measure, one wellbeing measure, and one dementia-specific measure was explored in each session. All sessions were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed thematically.

RESULTS

Nine individuals with mild dementia and 17 carers of people with dementia participated across 4 focus groups and 10 interviews. Participants perceived 9 broad QoL domains as relevant to them: Activity, Autonomy, Cognition, Communication, Coping, Emotions, End-of-Life, Physical Functioning, and Relationships. These domains had limited overlap with the content of the six PBMs. Assessment of face validity was summarized into eight themes: (1) ambiguous questions, (2) double -barrelled questions, (3) difficult/abstract questions, (4) judgemental/confronting questions, (5) lack of relevance and comprehensiveness, (6) response options, (7) layout/format and (8) proxy-response. There was no clear preference for one of the six measures explored; participants identified advantages and disadvantages across all measures. Although particularly designed for individuals with dementia, dementia-specific QoL measures were not always favoured over non-specific measures.

CONCLUSION

Given the shortcomings of PBMs identified in this study, further empirical comparative analyses are necessary to guide the selection of PBMs for future dementia research.

Capability instruments in economic evaluations of health-related interventions: a comparative review of the literature

PURPOSE

Given increasing interest in using the capability approach for health economic evaluations and a growing literature, this paper aims to synthesise current information about the characteristics of capability instruments and their application in health economic evaluations.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to assess studies that contained information on the development, psychometric properties and valuation of capability instruments, or their application in economic evaluations.

RESULTS

The review identified 98 studies and 14 instruments for inclusion. There is some evidence on the psychometric properties of most instruments. Most papers found moderate-to-high correlation between health and capability measures, ranging between 0.41 and 0.64. ASCOT, ICECAP-A, -O and -SCM instruments have published valuation sets, most frequently developed using best-worst scaling. Thirteen instruments were originally developed in English and one in Portuguese; however, some translations to other languages are available. Ten economic evaluations using capability instruments were identified. The presentation of results show a lack of consensus regarding the most appropriate way to use capability instruments in economic evaluations with discussion about capability-adjusted life years (CALYs), years of capability equivalence and the trade-off between maximisation of capability versus sufficient capability.

CONCLUSION

There has been increasing interest in applying the capability-based approach in health economic evaluations, but methodological and conceptual issues remain. There is still a need for direct comparison of the different capability instruments and for clear guidance on when and how they should be used in economic evaluations.

Capability of well-being: validation of the Hungarian version of the ICECAP-A and ICECAP-O questionnaires and population normative data

Purpose

We aimed to develop and assess the psychometric characteristics of the Hungarian language version of two well-being capability measures, the ICEpop CAPability measure for Adults/Older people (ICECAP-A/-O), and to establish population norms.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was performed involving a representative sample of the Hungarian population. Socio-demographic characteristics, the use and provision of informal care were recorded. The Minimum European Health Module (MEHM), EQ-5D-5L, WHO-5 well-being index, happiness and life satisfaction visual analogue scale (VAS), Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) measures were applied alongside the ICECAP-A (age-group 18–64) and ICECAP-O (age-group 65+).

Results

Altogether 1568 and 453 individuals completed the ICECAP-A/-O questionnaires, respectively. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.86 for both measures (internal consistency). Subgroup analyses showed positive associations between ICECAP-A/-O scores and marital status, employment, income, health status (MEHM) and informal care use (construct validity). Pearson correlations were strong (r > 0.5; p < 0.01) between ICECAP-A/-O indexes and EQ-5D-5L, WHO-5, happiness and satisfaction VAS and SWLS scores (convergent validity). The age, education, and marital status were no longer significant in the multiple regression analysis. Test–retest average (SD) scores were 0.88 (0.11) and 0.89 (0.10) for the ICECAP-A, and equally 0.86 (0.09) for the ICECAP-O (reliability).

Conclusion

This is the first study to provide ICECAP-A/-O population norms. Also, it is the first to explore associations with WHO-5 well-being index which, alongside the MEHM measures, enable estimates from routinely collected international health statistics. The Hungarian ICECAP-A/-O proved to be valid and reliable measurement tools. Socio-demographic characteristics had minor or no impact on ICECAP-A/-O. Other influencing factors deserve further investigation in future research.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11136-020-02542-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Instruments to measure quality of life in institutionalised older adults: Systematic review

This study analysed the available instruments intended to measure the quality of life of institutionalised older adults, the psychometric properties of said instruments, and their use. This review was conducted using six international databases. The quality of the psychometric properties was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. Twenty-four instruments which measure quality of life were analysed. The instruments assessed are related to two areas, thus establishing two stages of the concept of quality of life in the ageing process. The Dementia Quality of Life (DQoL) scale and the FACIT-Sp Spiritual Well-Being Scale were found to be the instruments with the best combination of length, high methodological quality, and bias control for use in older people with and without cognitive impairment, respectively. Knowing which instruments have higher quality will facilitate the evaluation of the aspects that influence quality of life in geriatric institutions.

A group intervention to improve quality of life for people with advanced dementia living in care homes: the Namaste feasibility cluster RCT

BACKGROUND

People with advanced dementia who live and die in nursing homes experience variable quality of life, care and dying. There is a need to identify appropriate, cost-effective interventions that facilitate high-quality end-of-life care provision.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the feasibility and acceptability to staff and family of conducting a cluster randomised controlled trial of the Namaste Care intervention for people with advanced dementia in nursing homes.

DESIGN

The study had three phases: (1) realist review and (2) intervention refinement to inform the design of (3) a feasibility cluster randomised controlled trial with a process evaluation and economic analysis. Clusters (nursing homes) were randomised in a 3 : 1 ratio to intervention or control (usual care). The nature of the intervention meant that blinding was not possible.

SETTING

Nursing homes in England providing care for people with dementia.

PARTICIPANTS

Residents with advanced dementia (assessed as having a Functional Assessment Staging Test score of 6 or 7), their informal carers and nursing home staff.

INTERVENTION

Namaste Care is a complex group intervention that provides structured personalised care in a dedicated space, focusing on enhancements to the physical environment, comfort management and sensory engagement.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The two contender primary outcome measures were Comfort Assessment in Dying - End of Life Care in Dementia for quality of dying (dementia) and Quality of Life in Late Stage Dementia for quality of life. The secondary outcomes were as follows: person with dementia, sleep/activity (actigraphy), neuropsychiatric symptoms, agitation and pain; informal carers, satisfaction with care at the end of life; staff members, person-centred care assessment, satisfaction with care at the end of life and readiness for change; and other data - health economic outcomes, medication/service use and intervention activity.

RESULTS

Phase 1 (realist review; 86 papers) identified that a key intervention component was the activities enabling the development of moments of connection. In phase 2, refinement of the intervention enabled the production of a user-friendly 16-page A4 booklet. In phase 3, eight nursing homes were recruited. Two homes withdrew before the intervention commenced; four intervention and two control homes completed the study. Residents with advanced dementia (n = 32) were recruited in intervention (n = 18) and control (n = 14) homes. Informal carers (total, n = 12: intervention, n = 5; control, n = 7) and 97 staff from eight sites (intervention, n = 75; control, n = 22) were recruited over a 6-month period. Recruitment is feasible. Completion rates of the primary outcome questionnaires were high at baseline (100%) and at 4 weeks (96.8%). The Quality of Life in Late Stage Dementia was more responsive to change over 24 weeks. Even where economic data were missing, these could be collected in a full trial. The intervention was acceptable; the dose varied depending on the staffing and physical environment of each care home. Staff and informal carers reported changes for the person with dementia in two ways: increased social engagement and greater calm. No adverse events related to the intervention were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

A subsequent definitive trial is feasible if there are amendments to the recruitment process, outcome measure choice and intervention specification.

FUTURE WORK

In a full trial, consideration is needed of the appropriate outcome measure that is sensitive to different participant responses, and of clear implementation principles for this person-centred intervention in a nursing home context.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN14948133.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 24, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A comparison of self and proxy quality of life ratings for people with dementia and their carers: a European prospective cohort study

Objectives: To identify correlates of self-rated and proxy-rated quality of life (QoL) in people with dementia on (i) a dementia-specific and (ii) a capability-wellbeing QoL measure at baseline and 12-month follow-up, and to consider such factors in the context of QoL intervention development.Method: Prospective clinical and demographic data were collected from 451 community-dwelling dyads (mild-moderate dementia) across eight European countries. QoL was measured using the QOL-AD and the ICECAP-O. Multivariate modelling identified correlates of self- and proxy-rated QoL at baseline and at 12-month follow-up.Results: Carer's proxy-ratings of QoL were significantly lower than self-ratings at all time-points for both measures. Proxy-ratings declined over time, but self-ratings remained stable. Baseline predictors of greater self-rated QoL were education, and greater functional ability and relationship quality. Greater proxy-rated QoL was associated with education and greater functional ability, relationship quality, carer social support and carer QoL, lower carer anxiety/depression and less severe neuropsychiatric symptoms in people with dementia. At follow-up, greater self-rated QoL was predicted by greater functional ability, relationship quality, carer social support and having a spousal carer. Greater proxy-rated QoL at follow-up was associated with the same factors as at baseline; however, the dyad living together was an additional predictive factor.Conclusion: Both proxy-ratings and self-ratings of QoL should be interpreted with caution and in the context of each individual caregiving relationship. Different functional, psychosocial, relational and contextual factors influence self- and proxy-ratings, and both sets of factors should be considered in the context of QoL intervention development for the dyad.

A Review of the Development and Application of Generic Preference-Based Instruments with the Older Population

Older people (aged 65 years and over) are the fastest growing age cohort in the majority of developed countries, and the proportion of individuals defined as the oldest old (aged 80 years and over) living with physical frailty and cognitive impairment is rising. These population changes put increasing pressure on health and aged care services, thus it is important to assess the cost effectiveness of interventions targeted for older people across health and aged care sectors to identify interventions with the strongest capacity to enhance older peoples' quality of life and provide value for money. Cost-utility analysis (CUA) is a form of economic evaluation that typically uses preference-based instruments to measure and value health-related quality of life for the calculation of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYS) to enable comparisons of the cost effectiveness of different interventions. A variety of generic preference-based instruments have been used to measure older people's quality of life, including the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT); Health Utility Index Mark 2 (HUI2); Health Utility Index Mark 3 (HUI3); Short-Form-6 Dimensions (SF-6D); Assessment of Quality of Life-6 dimensions (AQoL-6D); Assessment of Quality of Life-8 dimensions (AQoL-8D); Quality of Wellbeing Scale-Self-Administered (QWB-SA); 15 Dimensions (15D); EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D); and an older person specific preference-based instrument-the Investigating Choice Experiments Capability Measure for older people (ICECAP-O). This article reviews the development and application of these instruments within the older population and discusses the issues surrounding their use with this population. Areas for further research relating to the development and application of generic preference-based instruments with populations of older people are also highlighted.

A validation study of the ICECAP-O in informal carers of people with dementia from eight European Countries

PURPOSE

The pressure on healthcare budgets remains high, partially due to the ageing population. Economic evaluation can be a helpful tool to inform resource allocation in publicly financed systems. Such evaluations frequently use health-related outcome measures. However, in areas such as care of older people, improving health outcomes is not necessarily the main focus of care interventions and broader outcome measures, including outcomes for those providing informal care, may be preferred when evaluating such interventions. This paper validates a recently introduced well-being measure, the ICECAP-O, in a population of informal carers for people with dementia from eight European countries.

METHODS

Convergent and discriminant validity tests were performed to validate the ICECAP-O using data obtained in a sample of 451 respondents from Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden and the UK. These respondents completed a number of standardized questionnaires within the framework of the Actifcare project.

RESULTS

The ICECAP-O performed well among informal carers, in terms of both convergent and discriminant validity. In the multivariate analysis, it was found to be significantly associated with the age of the person with dementia, EQ-5D-5L health problem index of the person with dementia, carer-patient relationship, care recipient CDR, carer LSNS Score, the PAI score, and Perseverance Time.

CONCLUSION

The ICECAP-O appears to be a valid measure of well-being in informal carers for people with dementia. The ICECAP-O may therefore be useful as an outcome measure in economic evaluations of interventions aimed at such informal carers, when these aim to improve well-being beyond health.

ICECAP-O, the current state of play: a systematic review of studies reporting the psychometric properties and use of the instrument over the decade since its publication

PURPOSE

A paper reporting the development of the ICECAP-O was published in 2006. Since then, there has been increasing interest in the use of capability-based measures within health economics and the ICECAP-O has been suggested for use in economic evaluation by decision-making bodies in the Netherlands and UK.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies published between January 2006 and October 2018 which have assessed the psychometric properties of ICECAP-O or utilised the measure within economic evaluation.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies explored the psychometric properties of ICECAP-O and 21 have utilised the measure within economic evaluation; one study reported psychometric properties as well as utilising the measure within economic evaluation. The ICECAP-O has good construct validity and responsiveness, but there is evidence of some issues relating to content validity. In the context of economic evaluation, the ICECAP-O has, to date, mainly been included as a secondary economic measure and the reporting of results is brief with minimal detail and often no discussion. Five of the economic evaluation studies combined scores from ICECAP-O with time, but each used different terminology to describe this result.

CONCLUSION

Focus, in terms of publications, appears to have shifted now from assessment of psychometric properties to the utilisation of the ICECAP-O within economic evaluation. Further research is needed with respect to a decision-rule for the ICECAP measures. This additional research should also guide users in terms of appropriate analysis, terminology and presentation of results, which are in-keeping with the conceptual framework underpinning the ICECAP-O.

Measuring broader wellbeing in mental health services: validity of the German language OxCAP-MH capability instrument

PURPOSE

The OxCAP-MH capabilities questionnaire was developed and validated in the UK for outcome measurement in mental health clinical studies. Its broader wellbeing construct or validity in routine mental health services so far has not been assessed. The objectives were to investigate the extent the OxCAP-MH measures broader wellbeing compared to the EQ-5D-5L and to test psychometric properties of the German language OxCAP-MH in routine mental health services in Austria.

METHODS

Study sample consisted of patients in socio-psychiatric services (n = 159) assessed at baseline and 6-month follow-up. Underlying factors associated with quality-of-life/wellbeing concepts measured by the OxCAP-MH and EQ-5D-5L were identified in exploratory factor analysis (EFA). Responsiveness was assessed using anchor questionnaires and standardised response mean (SRM). For discriminant validity, subgroups of respondents were compared using t test and one-way ANOVA. Test-retest analysis was assessed for a period of maximum 30 days from the baseline assessment with intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC).

RESULTS

EFA identified a two-factor structure. All EQ-5D-5L items and seven OxCAP-MH items loaded on one factor and nine remaining OxCAP-MH items loaded on a separate factor. Responsiveness was found for patients who improved in anchor questionnaire scores with large or moderate SRM statistics. OxCAP-MH discriminated between various groups in univariable and multivariable analyses. Reliability of the German language OxCAP-MH was confirmed by ICC of 0.80.

CONCLUSIONS

Besides providing evidence that the OxCAP-MH measures broader wellbeing constructs beyond traditional health-related quality of life, the study also confirms the validity of the instrument for implementation in routine evaluation of mental health services.

Quality of life in older adults following a hip fracture: an empirical comparison of the ICECAP-O and the EQ-5D-3 L instruments

Background

The purpose of this study was to empirically compare the performance of two generic preference based quality of life instruments, EQ-5D-3 L (with a health and physical function focus) and ICECAP-O (with a wellbeing and capability focus), in a population of older Australians following hip fracture.

Methods

Older adults or their family member proxies (in cases of severe cognitive impairment) following surgery to repair a fractured hip were invited to take part in this cross sectional study. Inclusion criteria included an age of 60 years or older, confirmed falls-related hip fracture and those receiving current palliative care or consented to other research studies were excluded. 87 participants completed the ICECAP-O and EQ-5D-3 L instruments between one and three weeks post-surgery.

Results

For the hip fracture population, the mean ICECAP-O score was 0.639 (SD 0.206, n = 82) and the mean EQ-5D-3 L utility score was 0.545 (SD 0.251, n = 87). There was a statistically significant positive correlation between the ICECAP-O and EQ-5D-3 L scores (r = 0.529, p = < 0.001).

Conclusions

Study findings indicate significant impairments in quality of life post hip fracture. In multiple regression analyses, age and health-related QoL (measured by the EQ-5D) were significant determinants of ICECAP-O scores, while proxy respondent status, age, and capability-related QoL (measured by the ICECAP-O) were significant determinants of EQ-5D scores. Approaches to measuring and valuing quality of life in this sample, should consider the target domains of the intervention in their choice of instrument. Studies aiming to measure the impact of interventions targeting broader domains of wellbeing and QoL should consider including a broader measure of QoL in conjunction with a HRQoL measure.