Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Development and assessment of the Quality of Life Instruments for Chronic Diseases-Gout (QLICD-GO) (V2.0)

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Rheumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To develop and assess the Quality of Life Instruments for Chronic Diseases-Gout QLICD-GO (V2.0).

Methods

The instrument was developed using a programmatic decision-making method to combine the general module of the Quality of Life Instruments for Chronic Diseases and a new specific module. The instrument was assessed by measuring the quality of life of 116 patients with gout.

Results

The QLICD-GO (V2.0) included 28 items from the general module of chronic diseases and 12 items in three facets from the specific module. In addition to the field of physiological function, the internal consistency reliability of other fields and dimensions of the instrument was > 0.7, and the split-half reliability was > 0.5. Three common factors were extracted from the specific module, with a cumulative variance contribution rate of 57.54%. The standardized response means of the specific module and the whole instrument were 0.94 and 1.20, respectively.

Conclusions

The QLICD-GO (V2.0) has good reliability, validity, and responsiveness. The instrument comprehensively and objectively reflects the quality of life of patients with gout, and it can be used to assess treatment regimens developed by medical staff.

Key Points

• The QLICD-GO (V2.0) has been developed for patients with gout based upon the foundation of the QLICD-GM.

• The QLICD-GO reflects the clinical signs and symptoms, drug-related side effects, and psychological changes specific to patients with gout.

• Based on the assessment results, the QLICD-GO (V2.0) has good reliability, validity, and responsiveness.

• QLICD-GO (V2.0) can objectively and comprehensively reflect the QOL of patients with gout and can be used by clinical staff to assess treatment regimens.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

QLICD-GM :

The Quality of Life Instruments for Chronic Diseases

QQL :

Quality of life

RS :

Raw score

SS :

Standard score

SRM :

Standardized response mean

KMO :

Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin

References

  1. Li D, Zhang J (2016) Research advances in modern epidemiology of gout and urate-lowering agents. Rheum Arthritis 4:73–76

    Google Scholar 

  2. Li Z, Zhou Z, Hou X et al (2017) Replication of gout/urate concentrations GWAS susceptibility loci associated with gout in a Han Chinese population. Sci Rep 7(1):4094–4100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tatlock S, Rudell K, Panter C et al (2016) What outcomes are important for gout patients? In-depth qualitative research into the gout patient experience to determine optimal endpoints for evaluating therapeutic interventions. Patient 10(1):65–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Rui L, Cheng H, Di W et al (2015) Prevalence of hyperuricemia and gout in mainland China from 2000 to 2014: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Biomed Res Int 2015:762820

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wang S, Feng L, Song M et al (2016) Epidemiological survey of hyperuricemia and gout in newly recruited young male soldiers in Hohhot City. Med J Chin People’s Armed Police Force 27(1):5–7+11

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kempen GI (1992) The MOS short-form general health survey: single item vs multiple measures of health-related quality of life: some nuances. Psychol Rep 70(2):608–610

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Skevington SM, Lotfy M, O’Connell KA (2004) The World Health Organization’s WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: psychometric properties and results of the international field trial. A report from the WHOQOL group. Qual Life Res 13(2):299–310

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Fries JF, Spitz P, Kraines RG et al (1980) Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 23(2):137–145

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hirsch JD, Lee SJ, Terkeltaub R et al (2008) Evaluation of an instrument assessing influence of Gout on health-related quality of life. J Rheumatol 35(12):2406–2414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Aati O, Taylor WJ, Siegert RJ et al(2015)Development of a patient-reported outcome measure of tophus burden: the Tophus Impact Questionnaire (TIQ-20). Ann Rheum Dis 74(12):2144–2150

  11. Wan C, Tu X, Messing S et al (2010) Development and validation of the general module of the system of quality of life instruments for chronic diseases and its comparison with SF-36. J Pain Symptom Manage 42(1):93–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Zeng X (2015) An interpretation of the 2015 American College of Rheumatology/European League Against Rheumatism Gout Classification Criteria. Chin J Allergy Clin Immunol 9(4):235–238

    Google Scholar 

  13. Li Feng(2015)Development and validation of the Quality of Life Instrument for Patients with Psoriasis (QLICD-PS V2.0) and its primary clinical applications, MA thsis,Guangdong Medical University

  14. Luo S, Meng Q, Luo J et al (2015) Items selection on the specific module of Quality of Life Instruments for Patients with Prostate Cancer (QLICP-PR). J Kunming Med Univ 36(11):39–42

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wan C, Li H, Fan X et al (2014) Development and validation of the coronary heart disease scale under the system of quality of life instruments for chronic diseases QLICD-CHD: combinations of classical test theory and generalizability theory. Health Qual Life Outcomes 12(1):82–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lenderink AF, Zoer I, van der Molen HF et al (2012) Review on the validity of self-report to assess work-related diseases. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 85(3):229–251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Xinping Huang(2012) Development and application of the Quality of Life Instrument for Patients with Chronic Renal Failure (QLICD-CRF), MA thsis,Kunming Medical University

  18. Liuping Chen (2012) Development and its applications of Quality of Life Instruments for Chronic Diseases: Pulmonary Tuberculosis (QLICD-PT),MA thsis,Kunming Medical University

  19. Sun Y, Yang Z, Wan C et al (2018) Development and validation of the pulmonary tuberculosis scale of the system of Quality of Life Instruments for Chronic Diseases (QLICD-PT). Health Qual Life Outcomes 16(1):137–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Zhang Y, Zhou F, Sun Yu (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 [J]. Health Qual Life Outcomes 13(01):39–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Zhenqiu Sun, Yongyong Xu. (2010) Medical statistics, Third Edition. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House, 3:435–439

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all the participants for their contribution to this work.

Funding

This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (71373058, 8140277, and 30860248), Medical Science and Technology of Guangdong Province (B2019087), Young Innovative Talents Project of Guangdong Province (2018KQNCX096), and Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province (2019A1515010875).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

QL L and X L contributed equally to this work. QL L and CH W designed the study. XH X and XJ W did the literature search, study quality assessment, and data extraction. X L and P Z performed the statistical analysis and drafted the tables and figures. X L wrote the first draft of this analysis, and QL L helped to finish the final version. All authors approved the conclusions of our study.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haiyan Pan.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

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.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Disclosures

None.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Liu, Q., Liu, X., Zhang, P. et al. Development and assessment of the Quality of Life Instruments for Chronic Diseases-Gout (QLICD-GO) (V2.0). Clin Rheumatol 42, 501–509 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-022-06440-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-022-06440-4

Keywords

Navigation