Disparities between ophthalmologists and their patients in estimating quality of life

Current Opinion in Ophthalmology

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 238-243

  Stein, Joshua D ^a,b  

^a NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b NEW YORK UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Patient; Physician; Preferences; Quality of life; Utility score

Indexed keywords

CANCER; CATARACT; COST UTILITY ANALYSIS; DEPRESSION; DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; GLAUCOMA; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS INFECTION; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; OPHTHALMOLOGY; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RETINA MACULA DEGENERATION; RETINA MACULA LUTEA; REVIEW; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STEM CELL TRANSPLANTATION;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; OPHTHALMOLOGY; PATIENTS; PHYSICIANS; QUALITY OF LIFE; SICKNESS IMPACT PROFILE;

EID: 2442589795     PISSN: 10408738     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.icu.0000120712.35941.ad     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. Kassirer JP: Incorporating patients' preferences into medical decisions. N Engl J Med 1994, 330:1895-1896.
2. Dawn AG, Santiago-Turla C, Lee PP: Patient expectations regarding eye care. Arch Ophthalmol 2003, 121:762-768. This paper used focus groups to identify patient expectations from their ophthalmologists. They found that patients place a high priority on communication, explanation, listening, and personal connection, whereas technical skills were of less importance.
3. Ware JE: SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretive Guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1993.
4. Hunt SM, McKenna SP, McEwan J, et al.: A quantitative approach to perceived health states: a validation study. J Epidemiol Commun Health 1980, 34:281-286.
5. Cochrane R: A comparative evaluation of the Symptom Rating Scale and the Langner 22-item index for use in epidemiological surveys. Psychol Med 1980, 10:115-124.
6. Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, et al.: The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 1981, 19:787-805.
7. Kaplan RM, Anderson JP: A general health policy model: update and applications. Health Serv Res 1988, 23:203-235.
8. Fayers PM et al., EORTC QLQ-C30 Scoring Manual, 2nd ed. Brussels, Belgium: European Organization for Research on the Treatment of Cancer; 1999.
9. Massof RW, Rubin GS: Visual Function Assessment Questionnaires. Surv Ophthalmol 2001, 45:531-548.
10. Ellwein LB: Quality of life measures, In Issues in Low Vision Rehabilitation: Service Delivery, Policy, and Funding. Edited by Massof RW, Lidoff L. New York: AFB Press; 2001:143-158.
11. Ellwein LB, Fletcher A, Negrel AD, et al.: Quality of life assessment in blindness prevention interventions. Int Ophthalmol 1994, 18:283-288.
12. Mangione CM, Phillips RS, Seddon JM, et al.: Development of the "Activities of Daily Vision Scale": a measure of visual function status. Med Care 1992, 30:1111-1112.
13. Bernth-Petersen P: Visual functioning in cataract patients, methods of measuring and results. Acta Ophthalmol (Copenh) 1981, 59:198-205.
14. Brown MM, Brown CG, Sharma S, et al.: Evidence-based medicine, utilities, and quality of life. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 1999, 10:221-228.
15. Stein JD, Brown GC, Brown MM, et al.: The quality of life of patients with hypertension. J Clin Hypertens 2002, 4:181-188.
16. Brown MM: Health care economic analyses. Curr Opin Ophthalmol 2003, 14:117-121. This paper explains the various types of health care economic analyses and discusses how utility scores can be incorporated into such evaluations.
17. Kobelt G, Lundstrom M, Stenevi U: Cost-effectiveness of cataract surgery. Method to assess cost-effectiveness using registry data. J Cataract Refract Surg 2002, 28:1742-1749.
18. Brown GC, Brown MM, Sharma S, et al.: Utility values and macular degeneration. Arch Ophthalmol 2000, 118:47-51.
19. Brown MM, Brown GC, Sharma S, et al.: Utility values and diabetic retinopathy. Am J Ophthalmol 1999, 128:324-330.
20. Brown MM, Brown GC, Sharma S, et al.: Quality of life with unilateral and bilateral good vision. Ophthalmology 2001, 108:643-647.
21. Membrano JH, Brown MM, Brown GC, et al.: A cost-utility analysis of therapy for amblyopia. Ophthalmology 2002, 109:2265-2271.
22. Sharma S, Oliver-Fernandez A, Bakal J, et al.: Utilities associated with diabetic retinopathy: results from a Canadian sample. Br J Ophthalmol 2003, 87:259-261.
23. Schiffman RM, Walt JG, Jacobsen G, et al.: Utility assessment among patients with dry eye disease. Ophthalmology 2003, 100:1412-1419.
24. Busbee BG, Brown MM, Brown GC, et al.: Incremental cost-effectiveness of initial cataract surgery. Ophthalmology 2002, 109:606-613.
25. Stein JD, Brown MM, Brown GC, et al.: Quality of life with macular degeneration: perceptions of patients, clinicians, and community members. Br J Ophthalmol 2003, 87:8-12.
26. Jampel HD: Glaucoma patients' assessment of their visual function and quality of life. Trans Am Ophthalmol Soc 2001, 99:301-317.
27. Brown GC, Brown MM, Sharma S: Difference between ophthalmologists' and patients' perceptions of quality of life associated with age-related macular degeneration. Can J Ophthalmol 2000, 35:127-133.
28. Mitchell J, Bradley P, Anderson SJ: Perceived quality of health care in macular disease: a survey of members of the Macular Disease Society. Br J Ophthalmol 2000, 86:777-781.
29. Shoemaker JA: Vision Problems in the U.S.: Prevalence of Adult Vision Impairment and Age-Related Eye Disease in America. Bethesda, MD, and Schaumburg, IL: National Eye Institute and Prevent Blindness America; 2002.
30. Rothwell PM, McDowell Z, Wong CK, et al.: Doctors and patients don't agree. Cross sectional study of patients' and doctors' perceptions and assessments of disability in multiple sclerosis. BMJ 1997, 314:1580-1583.
31. Lieberman JR, Dorey F, Shekelle P, et al.: Differences between patients' and physicians' evaluations of outcome after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1996, 87:835-838.
32. Schrader GD: Subjective and objective assessment of medical comorbidity in chronic depression. Psychother Psychosom 1997, 66:258-260.
33. Meropol NJ, Weinfurt KP, Burnett CB, et al.: Perceptions of patients and physicians regarding phase I cancer clinical trials: implications for physician-patient communication. J Clin Oncol 2003, 21:2589-2596.
34. Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Yarnold JR, et al.: Cosmetic and functional outcomes of breast conserving treatment for early stage breast cancer, I. Comparison of patients' ratings, observer ratings, and objective assessments. Radiother Oncol 1992, 25:153-159.
35. Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Sprangers MA, et al.: Evaluating the quality of life of cancer patients: assessments by patients, significant others, physicians, and nurses. Br J Cancer 1999, 81:87-94.
36. Hendriks MG, Schouten HC: Quality of life after stem cell transplantation: a patient, partner, and physician perspective. Eur J Intern Med 2002, 13:52-56.
37. Justice AC, Chang CH, Rabeneck L, et al.: Clinical importance of provider-reported HIV symptoms compared with patient-report. Med Care 2001, 39:397-408.
38. Carr AJ, Higginson IJ: Are quality of life measures patient centred? [Review] BMJ 2001, 322:1357-1360.
39. Farsides B, Dunlop RJ: Is there such a thing as a life not worth living? BMJ 2001, 322:1481-1483.
40. Addington-Hall J, Kalra L: Who should measure quality of life? BMJ 2001, 322:1417-1420.
41. Bowling A, Ebrahim S: Measuring patients' preferences for treatment and perceptions of risk [Review]. Qual Health Care 2001, 10(suppl 1):i2-i8.
42. Charles C, Whelan T, Gafni A: What do we mean by partnership in making decisions about treatment? [Review] BMJ 1999, 319:780-782.
43. Robinson A, Thomson R: Variability in patient preferences for participating in medical decision making: implication for the use of decision support tools [Review]. Qual Health Care 2001, 10(suppl 1):i34-i38.
44. Fahey T: Commentary: Varied preferences reflect the reality of clinical practice. BMJ 2001, 323:1221-1222.
45. Weston WW: Informed and shared decision-making: the crux of patient-centered care. CMAJ 2001, 165:438-439.
46. Godolphin W: The role of risk communication in shared decision making. BMJ 2003, 327:692-693.
47. Deyo RA: A key medical decision maker: the patient. BMJ 2001, 323:466-467.
48. Kravitz RL, Melnikow J: Engaging patients in medical decision making. BMJ 2001, 323:584-585.
49. Higginson IJ, Carr AJ: Measuring quality of life: using quality of life measures in the clinical setting. BMJ 2001, 322:1297-1300.
50. Eddy DM: Rationing by patient choice. In Clinical Decision Making: From Theory to Practice. London: Jones and Bartlett Publishers International; 1996:84-93.
51. Brown GC, Brown MM, Sharma S: Value-based medicine: evidence-based medicine and beyond. Ocul Immunol Inflamm 2003, 11:157-170.
52. Brown MM, Brown GC: Outcome of corneal transplantation. Br J Ophthalmol 2002, 86:2-3.
53. Brown MM, Brown GC, Sharma S, et al.: Health care economic analyses and value-based medicine [Review]. Surv Ophthalmol 2003, 48:204-223. This review article provides an excellent overview of the different types of health care economic analyses and QOL instruments. Moreover, it discusses how utility scores can be used to determine which interventions confer the most value.