Abstract
Purpose
Our main objective was to compare the change in a validated quality of life measure to a global assessment measure. The secondary objectives were to estimate the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and to describe the change in quality of life by surgical specialty.
Methods
This prospective cohort study included 7902 adult patients undergoing elective surgery. Changes in the Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12), composed of a physical component summary (PCS) and a mental component summary (MCS), were calculated using preoperative and postoperative questionnaires. The latter also contained a global assessment question for quality of life. We compared PCS and MCS to the global assessment using descriptive statistics and weighted kappa. MCID was calculated using an anchor-based approach. Analyses were pre-specified and registered (NCT02771964).
Results
By the change in VR-12 scores, an equal proportion of patients experienced improvement and deterioration in quality of life (28% for PCS, 25% for MCS). In contrast, by the global assessment measure, 61% reported improvement, while only 10% reported deterioration. Agreement with the global assessment was slight for both PCS (kappa = 0.20, 57% matched) and MCS (kappa = 0.10, 54% matched). The MCID for the overall VR-12 score was approximately 2.5 points. Patients undergoing orthopedic surgery showed the most improvement in quality of life measures, while patients undergoing gastrointestinal/hepatobiliary or urologic surgery showed the most deterioration.
Conclusions
Subjective global quality of life report does not agree well with a validated quality of life instrument, perhaps due to patient over-optimism.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Urbach, D. R. (2005). Measuring quality of life after surgery. Surgical Innovation, 12(2), 161–165.
Lohr, K. N., & Zebrack, B. J. (2009). Using patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: Challenges and opportunities. Quality of Life Research, 18(1), 99–107.
Suk, K. S., Baek, J. H., Park, J. O., Kim, H. S., Lee, H. M., Kwon, J. W., et al. (2015). Postoperative quality of life in patients with progressive neuromuscular scoliosis and their parents. The Spine Journal, 15(3), 446–453.
Noyez, L. (2014). Is quality of life post cardiac surgery overestimated? Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 12, 62.
Maillard, J., Elia, N., Haller, C. S., Delhumeau, C., & Walder, B. (2015). Preoperative and early postoperative quality of life after major surgery - a prospective observational study. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 13, 12.
Ubel, P. A., Loewenstein, G., Schwarz, N., & Smith, D. (2005). Misimagining the unimaginable: The disability paradox and health care decision making. Health Psychology, 24(4 Suppl), S57–S62.
Velanovich, V., Younga, J., Bhandarkar, V., Marshall, N., McLaren, P., Ritz, J., et al. (2012). A single, global patient-centered measure from the SF-36 instrument to assess surgical outcomes and quality of life: A pilot study. World Journal of Surgery, 36(9), 2045–2050.
Smith, D., Loewenstein, G., Jepson, C., Jankovich, A., Feldman, H., & Ubel, P. (2008). Mispredicting and misremembering: Patients with renal failure overestimate improvements in quality of life after a kidney transplant. Health Psychology, 27(5), 653–658.
Mather, M., Shafir, E., & Johnson, M. K. (2000). Misremembrance of options past: Source monitoring and choice. Psychological Science, 11(2), 132–138.
Smith, D. M., Sherriff, R. L., Damschroder, L., Loewenstein, G., & Ubel, P. A. (2006). Misremembering colostomies? Former patients give lower utility ratings than do current patients. Health Psychology, 25(6), 688–695.
Mangione, C. M., Goldman, L., Orav, E. J., Marcantonio, E. R., Pedan, A., Ludwig, L. E., et al. (1997). Health-related quality of life after elective surgery: Measurement of longitudinal changes. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 12(11), 686–697.
Turel, M. K., Thakar, S., & Rajshekhar, V. (2015). Quality of life following surgery for large and giant vestibular schwannomas: A prospective study. Journal of Neurosurgery, 122(2), 303–311.
Carreon, L. Y., Bratcher, K. R., Canan, C. E., Burke, L. O., Djurasovic, M., & Glassman, S. D. (2013). Differentiating minimum clinically important difference for primary and revision lumbar fusion surgeries. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 18(1), 102–106.
Zhou, F., Zhang, Y., Sun, Y., Zhang, F., Pan, S., & Liu, Z. (2015). Assessment of the minimum clinically important difference in neurological function and quality of life after surgery in cervical spondylotic myelopathy patients: A prospective cohort study. European Spine Journal, 24(12), 2918–2923.
von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gotzsche, P. C., & Vandenbroucke, J. P. (2014). The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. International Journal of Surgery (London, England), 12(12), 1495–1499.
Avidan, M. S. ([cited 2016 Feb 10]). Systematic Assessment and Targeted Improvement of Services Following Yearlong Surgical Outcomes Surveys (SATISFY-SOS). In: ClinicalTrials.gov.
Kronzer, V. L., Jerry, M. R., & Avidan, M. S. (2016). Assessing change in patient-reported quality of life after elective surgery: Protocol for an observational comparison study. F1000Research, 5, 976.
Kazis, L. E., Miller, D. R., Skinner, K. M., Lee, A., Ren, X. S., Clark, J. A., et al. (2006). Applications of methodologies of the Veterans Health Study in the VA healthcare system: Conclusions and summary. Journal of Ambulatory Care Management, 29(2), 182–188.
Kazis, L. E., Selim, A., Rogers, W., Ren, X. S., Lee, A., & Miller, D. R. (2006). Dissemination of methods and results from the veterans health study: Final comments and implications for future monitoring strategies within and outside the veterans healthcare system. Journal of Ambulatory Care Management, 29(4), 310–319.
Selim, A. J., Rogers, W., Fleishman, J. A., Qian, S. X., Fincke, B. G., Rothendler, J. A., et al. (2009). Updated U.S. population standard for the Veterans RAND 12-item Health Survey (VR-12). Quality of Life Research, 18(1), 43–52.
Lamb, S. E., Jorstad-Stein, E. C., Hauer, K., & Becker, C. (2005). Development of a common outcome data set for fall injury prevention trials: The Prevention of Falls Network Europe consensus. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 53(9), 1618–1622.
Kronzer, V. L., Jerry, M. R., Ben Abdallah, A., Wildes, T. S., Stark, S. L., McKinnon, S. L., et al. (2016). Preoperative falls predict postoperative falls, functional decline, and surgical complications. EBioMedicine, 12, 302–308.
van Buuren, S. (2007). Multiple imputation of discrete and continuous data by fully conditional specification. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 16(3), 219–242.
Liu, H., & Hays, R. D. Measurement of interrater agreement: A SAS/IML Macro Kappa procedure for handling incomplete data. In Twenty-Fourth Annual SAS Users Group International Conference, April 11–14, 1999 (pp. 1620–1625).
Crosby, R. D., Kolotkin, R. L., & Williams, G. R. (2003). Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 56(5), 395–407.
Youden, W. J. (1950). Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer, 3(1), 32–35.
Lee, T. H., Marcantonio, E. R., Mangione, C. M., Thomas, E. J., Polanczyk, C. A., Cook, E. F., et al. (1999). Derivation and prospective validation of a simple index for prediction of cardiac risk of major noncardiac surgery. Circulation, 100(10), 1043–1049.
Norman, G. R., Sloan, J. A., & Wyrwich, K. W. (2003). Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: The remarkable universality of half a standard deviation. Medical Care, 41(5), 582–592.
Coteur, G., Feagan, B., Keininger, D. L., & Kosinski, M. (2009). Evaluation of the meaningfulness of health-related quality of life improvements as assessed by the SF-36 and the EQ-5D VAS in patients with active Crohn’s disease. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 29(9), 1032–1041.
Zhang, Y., Zhou, F., & Sun, Y. (2015). Assessment of health-related quality of life using the SF-36 in Chinese cervical spondylotic myelopathy patients after surgery and its consistency with neurological function assessment: A cohort study. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 13, 39.
Bahler, C. D., & Sundaram, C. P. (2013). Quality of life following laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy. JSLS: Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons, 17(2), 273–278.
Dawson, J., Doll, H., Coffey, J., & Jenkinson, C. (2007). Responsiveness and minimally important change for the Manchester-Oxford foot questionnaire (MOXFQ) compared with AOFAS and SF-36 assessments following surgery for hallux valgus. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 15(8), 918–931.
Shi, H. Y., Lee, H. H., Chiu, C. C., Chiu, H. C., Uen, Y. H., & Lee, K. T. (2008). Responsiveness and minimal clinically important differences after cholecystectomy: GIQLI versus SF-36. Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery, 12(7), 1275–1282.
Bilbao, A., Quintana, J. M., Escobar, A., Garcia, S., Andradas, E., Bare, M., et al. (2009). Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the VF-14 index, SF-36, and visual acuity in patients undergoing cataract surgery. Ophthalmology, 116(3), 418–424.e411.
Helsten, D. L., Abdallah, A. B., Avidan, M. S., Wildes, T. S., Winter, A., McKinnon, S. L., et al. (2016). Methodological considerations for collecting patient reported outcomes from unselected surgical patients. Anesthesiology, 125(3), 495–504.
Copay, A. G., Subach, B. R., Glassman, S. D., Polly, D. W. Jr., & Schuler, T. C. (2007). Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: A review of concepts and methods. The Spine Journal, 7(5), 541–546.
Wright, A., Hannon, J., Hegedus, E. J., & Kavchak, A. E. (2012). Clinimetrics corner: A closer look at the minimal clinically important difference (MCID). Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy, 20(3), 160–166.
Acknowledgements
We thank Dawn Anderson, Marsha Fizette, Mark Foesterling, Stacey Hellman, Michelle Hieger, Mary Kehrer, Jill Lafata,Jessica McGowan, Angelika Nagele, Keryn Padgett, Mary Scherer, Tina Thomlison, Bonnie Vemmer, Linda Wiemer, Pathena Williams, Tammy Murphy, and Amy Campbell for their hard work in consenting patients for SATISFY-SOS.
Funding
VLK was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) [Grant UL1TR000448, subaward TL1TR000449]. MSA was supported by the National Institute on Aging [Grant 1UH2AG050312-01] and the Barnes Jewish Hospital Foundation [Grant BJHF#7937-77]. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official view of the NIH. The funding sources provided infrastructure and financial support but had no role in the design or conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in this study.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kronzer, V.L., Jerry, M.R., Ben Abdallah, A. et al. Changes in quality of life after elective surgery: an observational study comparing two measures. Qual Life Res 26, 2093–2102 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1560-2
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-017-1560-2