Premium
Assessing Health‐Related Quality of Life in Elderly Outpatients: Telephone Versus Face‐to‐Face Administration
Author(s) -
Weinberger Morris,
Nagle Becky,
Hanlon Joseph T.,
Samsa Gregory P.,
Schmader Kenneth,
Landsman Pamela B.,
Uttech Kay M.,
Cowper Patricia A.,
Cohen Harvey J.,
Feussner John R.
Publication year - 1994
Publication title -
journal of the american geriatrics society
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.992
H-Index - 232
eISSN - 1532-5415
pISSN - 0002-8614
DOI - 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1994.tb06515.x
Subject(s) - medicine , randomized controlled trial , context (archaeology) , veterans affairs , quality of life (healthcare) , telephone interview , face to face , pharmacist , physical therapy , health care , family medicine , gerontology , pharmacy , nursing , epistemology , paleontology , social science , philosophy , sociology , biology , economics , economic growth
OBJECTIVE: While health‐related quality of life (HRQOL) is increasingly being used as an outcome in clinical trials, it is unknown whether HRQOL assessments are influenced by the method of administration. Within the context of a randomized, controlled trial evaluating a pharmacist intervention for elderly outpatients prescribed at least five medications, we compared telephone and face‐to‐face administration of the SF‐36, a widely used HRQOL measure. DESIGN: Survey SETTING: General Medicine Clinic, Veterans Affairs Medical Center PATIENTS: At entry, participants in the randomized trial received continuous care from a general medicine clinic physician, were>65 years of age, and were prescribed>5 regularly scheduled medications. Patients were excluded if they were cognitively impaired and had no caregiver available to participate in the study as a proxy or if they resided in a nursing home. MEASUREMENTS: Subjects completed the SF‐36 by telephone at doseout and face‐to‐face at clinic visits within 1 month (mean = 16.7 days). MAIN RESULTS: Telephone administration required significantly less time than face‐to‐face interviews (10.2 vs 14.0 minutes, P < 0.001). Although systematic differences between modes of administration were generally small, there were substantial nonsystematic discrepancies for all eight SF‐36 scales (mean absolute difference scores ranged from 10.8 to 30.1). Discrepancies were greatest for emotional role functioning, physical role functioning, social functioning, and bodily pain; these four scales also demonstrated low to moderate correlations (.33 to .58). CONCLUSIONS: The two modes of administration may not produce interchangeable results. Researchers should be cautious when mixing modes of administration to elderly patients. J Am Geriatr Soc 42: 1295–1299, 1994.