1barriers to the use of health status measures in clinical investigation, patient care, and policy research

Richard (Rick) Deyo, Donald L. Patrick

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

189 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Despite growing interest and sophistication in health status assessment, these measures are not widely used in settings where they would be appropriate. The reasons include conceptual, methodologic, practical, and attitudinal barriers, some of which are common to a variety of applications (e.g., clinical research, patient care, or policy research). These barriers include skepticism about the validity and importance of self-rated health; preferences for physiologic outcomes or death rates; unfamiliarity with questionnaire scores; a paucity of direct instrument comparisons to aid in selection; and the costs of pilot testing, data collection, and data manipulation. In clinical trials, the uncertain responsiveness of questionnaire instruments to small but clinically important changes may be of particular concern. For patient care, additional barriers are posed by the need for rapidly processing data, the need for providing highly understandable results to clinicians, and clinicians’ uncertainty about how to use the information. In policy research, there is often insufficient time for responding (with health status measurement) to decision makers’ needs, and many have reservations about concepts such as quality-adjusted life years that arise from health status measurement. To facilitate a better intuitive grasp of health status scores, more comparisons with traditional clinical scales and physiologic measures are needed. More effort should be given to demonstrating (and improving) the responsiveness of scales to clinically important changes and to developing very brief questionnaires. Better education of health professionals about these measurement techniques is needed, as well as better methods of presenting results. Finally, a “laboratory” to provide measurement services to investigators and clinicians may make use of these scales more attractive.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)S254-S263
JournalMedical Care
Volume27
Issue number3
StatePublished - 1989
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

research policy
patient care
Health Status
health status
Patient Care
Research
questionnaire
Professional Education
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
death rate
Hand Strength
Health Education
health professionals
Uncertainty
manipulation
decision maker
Research Personnel
Clinical Trials
uncertainty
Costs and Cost Analysis

Keywords

  • Health policy
  • Health status
  • Quality of life
  • Research design

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Nursing(all)
  • Health(social science)
  • Health Professions(all)

Cite this

1barriers to the use of health status measures in clinical investigation, patient care, and policy research. / Deyo, Richard (Rick); Patrick, Donald L.

In: Medical Care, Vol. 27, No. 3, 1989, p. S254-S263.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f8e377c2c17040848882c54846204790,
title = "1barriers to the use of health status measures in clinical investigation, patient care, and policy research",
abstract = "Despite growing interest and sophistication in health status assessment, these measures are not widely used in settings where they would be appropriate. The reasons include conceptual, methodologic, practical, and attitudinal barriers, some of which are common to a variety of applications (e.g., clinical research, patient care, or policy research). These barriers include skepticism about the validity and importance of self-rated health; preferences for physiologic outcomes or death rates; unfamiliarity with questionnaire scores; a paucity of direct instrument comparisons to aid in selection; and the costs of pilot testing, data collection, and data manipulation. In clinical trials, the uncertain responsiveness of questionnaire instruments to small but clinically important changes may be of particular concern. For patient care, additional barriers are posed by the need for rapidly processing data, the need for providing highly understandable results to clinicians, and clinicians’ uncertainty about how to use the information. In policy research, there is often insufficient time for responding (with health status measurement) to decision makers’ needs, and many have reservations about concepts such as quality-adjusted life years that arise from health status measurement. To facilitate a better intuitive grasp of health status scores, more comparisons with traditional clinical scales and physiologic measures are needed. More effort should be given to demonstrating (and improving) the responsiveness of scales to clinically important changes and to developing very brief questionnaires. Better education of health professionals about these measurement techniques is needed, as well as better methods of presenting results. Finally, a “laboratory” to provide measurement services to investigators and clinicians may make use of these scales more attractive.",
keywords = "Health policy, Health status, Quality of life, Research design",
author = "Deyo, {Richard (Rick)} and Patrick, {Donald L.}",
year = "1989",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "S254--S263",
journal = "Medical Care",
issn = "0025-7079",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - 1barriers to the use of health status measures in clinical investigation, patient care, and policy research

AU - Deyo, Richard (Rick)

AU - Patrick, Donald L.

PY - 1989

Y1 - 1989

N2 - Despite growing interest and sophistication in health status assessment, these measures are not widely used in settings where they would be appropriate. The reasons include conceptual, methodologic, practical, and attitudinal barriers, some of which are common to a variety of applications (e.g., clinical research, patient care, or policy research). These barriers include skepticism about the validity and importance of self-rated health; preferences for physiologic outcomes or death rates; unfamiliarity with questionnaire scores; a paucity of direct instrument comparisons to aid in selection; and the costs of pilot testing, data collection, and data manipulation. In clinical trials, the uncertain responsiveness of questionnaire instruments to small but clinically important changes may be of particular concern. For patient care, additional barriers are posed by the need for rapidly processing data, the need for providing highly understandable results to clinicians, and clinicians’ uncertainty about how to use the information. In policy research, there is often insufficient time for responding (with health status measurement) to decision makers’ needs, and many have reservations about concepts such as quality-adjusted life years that arise from health status measurement. To facilitate a better intuitive grasp of health status scores, more comparisons with traditional clinical scales and physiologic measures are needed. More effort should be given to demonstrating (and improving) the responsiveness of scales to clinically important changes and to developing very brief questionnaires. Better education of health professionals about these measurement techniques is needed, as well as better methods of presenting results. Finally, a “laboratory” to provide measurement services to investigators and clinicians may make use of these scales more attractive.

AB - Despite growing interest and sophistication in health status assessment, these measures are not widely used in settings where they would be appropriate. The reasons include conceptual, methodologic, practical, and attitudinal barriers, some of which are common to a variety of applications (e.g., clinical research, patient care, or policy research). These barriers include skepticism about the validity and importance of self-rated health; preferences for physiologic outcomes or death rates; unfamiliarity with questionnaire scores; a paucity of direct instrument comparisons to aid in selection; and the costs of pilot testing, data collection, and data manipulation. In clinical trials, the uncertain responsiveness of questionnaire instruments to small but clinically important changes may be of particular concern. For patient care, additional barriers are posed by the need for rapidly processing data, the need for providing highly understandable results to clinicians, and clinicians’ uncertainty about how to use the information. In policy research, there is often insufficient time for responding (with health status measurement) to decision makers’ needs, and many have reservations about concepts such as quality-adjusted life years that arise from health status measurement. To facilitate a better intuitive grasp of health status scores, more comparisons with traditional clinical scales and physiologic measures are needed. More effort should be given to demonstrating (and improving) the responsiveness of scales to clinically important changes and to developing very brief questionnaires. Better education of health professionals about these measurement techniques is needed, as well as better methods of presenting results. Finally, a “laboratory” to provide measurement services to investigators and clinicians may make use of these scales more attractive.

KW - Health policy

KW - Health status

KW - Quality of life

KW - Research design

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0024632670&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0024632670&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 27

SP - S254-S263

JO - Medical Care

JF - Medical Care

SN - 0025-7079

IS - 3

ER -