RESUMO
PURPOSE: To determine the relationships between impact of secondary health conditions (SHCs), treatment of SHCs, and life satisfaction (LS) following spinal cord injury (SCI) across 21 countries. Hypotheses were as follows: (1) Persons with SCI and fewer SHCs report higher LS and (2) Persons who receive treatment for SHCs report higher LS than those who do not receive treatment. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey, including 10,499 persons with traumatic or non-traumatic SCI aged 18 years or older and living in the community. To assess SHCs, 14 items adapted from the SCI-Secondary Conditions Scale were used (range 1-5). SHCs index was calculated as the mean of all 14 items. LS was assessed using a selection of 5 items from the World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment. LS index was calculated as the mean of these 5 items. RESULTS: South Korea, Germany, and Poland exhibited the highest (2.40-2.93) and Brazil, China, and Thailand the lowest (1.79-1.90) impact of SHCs. Indexes for LS and SHCs were inversely correlated (- 0.418; p < 0.001). Mixed Model Analysis showed that the fixed effect (key predictors of the study) of SHCs index (p < 0.001) and the positive interaction between SHCs index and treatment (p = 0.002) were significant determinants of LS. CONCLUSION: Persons with SCI across the world are more likely to perceive better LS if they experience fewer SHCs and receive treatment for SHCs, in comparison to those who do not. Prevention and treatment of SHCs following SCI should be a high priority in order to improve the lived experience and enhance LS.
Assuntos
Qualidade de Vida , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal , Humanos , Qualidade de Vida/psicologia , Estudos Transversais , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/reabilitação , Satisfação Pessoal , BrasilRESUMO
STUDY DESIGN: Mixed methods inquiry using cognitive interviews and thematic content analysis. OBJECTIVES: Cross-validation of the concept of quality of life (QoL) and of the International Spinal Cord Injury Quality of Life Basic DataSet (SCI QoL-BDS) items across five sites in four countries: United States, Australia, Brazil, and the Netherlands. Analysis aimed to uncover patterns, differences, and similarities suggesting conceptual equivalence for overall QoL and the three SCI QoL-BDS items. SETTING: International, community. METHODS: Semi-structured cognitive interviews with 51 participants across five sites and four countries. Participants with spinal cord injury/disease (SCI/D) completed the SCI QoL-BDS items and one additional question. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were coded using NVivo software. Coded data were analyzed using thematic content analysis. Seventeen themes were identified. Responses by sites were compared for conceptual equivalence. RESULTS: Across the five sites, equivalence in the conceptual meaning of QoL was found based on the frequent commonalities in terminology employed to describe it. Despite sample differences in terms of demographic and SCI characteristics, participants across all sites replied to the SCI QoL-BDS items in a similar way, suggesting good item equivalence. Qualitatively, the differences noted with respect to the use of themes for each question suggest some variability on how participants with SCI/D describe QoL. In spite of these contextual differences, there is a high degree of commonalty not explained by participants' demographic or injury/disease characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: The SCI QoL-BDS shows good cross-cultural validity among the international sites included in this study.
Assuntos
Qualidade de Vida , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal , Brasil , Comparação Transcultural , Humanos , Psicometria , Qualidade de Vida/psicologia , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/psicologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Quality of life (QoL) in persons with spinal cord injury (SCI) has been found to differ across countries. However, comparability of measurement results between countries depends on the cross-cultural validity of the applied instruments. The study examined the metric quality and cross-cultural validity of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), the Life Satisfaction Questionnaire (LISAT-9), the Personal Well-Being Index (PWI) and the 5-item World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQoL-5) across six countries in a sample of persons with spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS: A cross-sectional multi-centre study was conducted and the data of 243 out-patients with SCI from study centers in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, South Africa, and the United States were analyzed using Rasch-based methods. RESULTS: The analyses showed high reliability for all 4 instruments (person reliability index .78-.92). Unidimensionality of measurement was supported for the WHOQoL-5 (Chi2 = 16.43, df = 10, p = .088), partially supported for the PWI (Chi2 = 15.62, df = 16, p = .480), but rejected for the LISAT-9 (Chi2 = 50.60, df = 18, p = .000) and the SWLS (Chi2 = 78.54, df = 10, p = .000) based on overall and item-wise Chi2 tests, principal components analyses and independent t-tests. The response scales showed the expected ordering for the WHOQoL-5 and the PWI, but not for the other two instruments. Using differential item functioning (DIF) analyses potential cross-country bias was found in two items of the SWLS and the WHOQoL-5, three items of the LISAT-9 and four items of the PWI. However, applying Rasch-based statistical methods, especially subtest analyses, it was possible to identify optimal strategies to enhance the metric properties and the cross-country equivalence of the instruments post-hoc. Following the post-hoc procedures the WHOQOL-5 and the PWI worked in a consistent and expected way in all countries. CONCLUSIONS: QoL assessment using the summary scores of the WHOQOL-5 and the PWI appeared cross-culturally valid in persons with SCI. In contrast, summary scores of the LISAT-9 and the SWLS have to be interpreted with caution. The findings of the current study can be especially helpful to select instruments for international research projects in SCI.