Advertisement

Quality of Life Research

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 575–585 | Cite as

Using the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) among Older Adult Inpatients with Varying Cognitive Function

  • Eva Baró
  • Montse Ferrer
  • Olga Vázquez
  • Ramón Miralles
  • Angels Pont
  • Asunción Esperanza
  • Antoni Ma Cervera
  • Jordi Alonso
Article

Abstract

Background: High rates of missing, non-applicable items and insufficient reliability have been frequently reported as limitations of the generic Quality of Life questionnaires for older patients. The Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) might be more suitable as it contains easy to respond (yes/no) items covering moderate-to-severe health deterioration. Objectives: To assess feasibility, reliability and validity of the NHP in disabled, older patients. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Acute care hospital. Subjects: 134 inpatients aged ≥65 with severe disability, abnormal cognitive function, or other persistent health problems precluding their discharge. Methods: The (interviewer-administered) NHP, Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Barthel Index, and diagnostic information were recorded. Results: Completion rates varied from 98% of the 49 patients with normal cognition (MMSE ≥21) and 86.3% of the 51 with moderate cognitive impairment (MMSE 10–20), to 5.9% of the 34 with severe cognitive impairment (MMSE<10). Cronbach’s alpha of the total NHP score was near 0.9 (0.82 and 0.87 for patients with MMSE ≥ 21 and 10–20, respectively; p = 0.291). The correlation between ‘Physical Mobility’ of the NHP and Barthel Index was also similar in both cognitive groups (0.39 and 0.40). Conclusion: Interviewer-administered NHP is suitable, reliable and valid, even in patients with moderate cognitive function.

Keywords

cognitive disorders frail elderly geriatric assessment Quality of Life questionnaire 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hayes, V, Morris, J, Wolfe, C,  et al. 1995The SF-36 Health Survey Questionnaire: is it suitable for use with older adultsAge Ageing24120125PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hill, S, Harries, U, Popay, J 1996Is the short form 36 (SF-36) suitable for routine health outcomes assessment in health care for older people? Evidence from preliminary work in community based health services in EnglandJ Epidemiol Community Health509498PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brazier, JE, Walters, SJ, Nicholl, JP,  et al. 1996Using the SF-36 and Euroqol on an elderly populationQual Life Res5195204CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hobson, JP, Meara, RJ 1997Is the SF-36 health survey questionnaire suitable as a self-report measure of the health status of older adults with Parkinson’s disease?Qual Life Res6213216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stadnyk, K, Calder, J, Rockwood, K 1998Testing the measurement properties of the Short Form-36 Health Survey in a frail elderly populationJ Clin Epidemiol51827835CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mallinson, S 1998The Short-Form 36 and older people: some problems encountered when using postal administrationJ Epidemiol Community Health52324328PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    O’Mahony, PG, Rodgers, H, Thomson, RG,  et al. 1998Is the SF-36 suitable for assessing health status of older stroke patients?Age Ageing271922PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Parker, SG, Peet, SM, Jagger, C,  et al. 1998Measuring health status in older patients. The SF-36 in practiceAge Ageing271318PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carver, DJ, Chapman, CA, Thomas, VS,  et al. 1999Validity and reliability of the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-20 questionnaire as a measure of quality of life in elderly people living at homeAge Ageing28169174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Seymour, DG, Ball, AE, Russell, EM,  et al. 2001Problems in using health survey questionnaires in older patients with physical disabilities. The reliability and validity of the SF-36 and the effect of cognitive impairmentJ Eval Clin Pract7411418CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Iglesias, CP, Birks, YF, Torgerson, DJ 2001Improving the measurement of quality of life in older people: the York SF-12Q J Med94695698Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Novella, JL, Jochum, C, Ankri, J,  et al. 2001Measuring general health status in dementia: practical and methodological issues in using the SF-36Aging13362369PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Novella, J, Ankri, J, Morrone, I,  et al. 2001Evaluation of the quality of life in dementia with a generic quality of life questionnaire: the Duke Health ProfileDement Geriatr Cogn Disord12158166CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bureau-Chalot, F, Novella, JL, Jolly, D,  et al. 2002Feasibility, acceptability and internal consistency reliability of the nottingham health profile in dementia patientsGerontology48220225CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ferrer, M, Alonso, J 1998The use of the Short Form (SF)-36 questionnaire for older adultsAge Ageing27755756PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lyons, RA, Perry, HM, Littlepage, BN 1994Evidence for the validity of the Short-form 36 Questionnaire (SF-36) in an elderly populationAge Ageing23182184PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mozley, CG, Huxley, P, Sutcliffe, C,  et al. 1999‘Not knowing where I am doesn’t mean I don’t know what I like’: cognitive impairment and quality of life responses in elderly peopleInt J Geriatr Psychiatry14776783CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Feinberg, LF, Whitlatch, CJ 2001Are persons with cognitive impairment able to state consistent choices?Gerontologist41374382PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Miralles, R, Sabartes, O, Ferrer, M,  et al. 2003Development and Validation of an Instrument to Predict Probability of Home Discharge from a Geriatric Convalescence Unit in SpainJ Am Geriatr Soc51252257CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mauskopf, JA, Austin, R, Dix, LP,  et al. 1995Estimating the value of a generic quality-of-life measureMed Care33AS195202PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lamarca, R, Alonso, J, Santed, R,  et al. 2001Performance of a perceived health measure in different groups of the population: a comprehensive study in SpainJ Clin Epidemiol54127135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Inouye, SK, Dyck, CH , Alessi, CA,  et al. 1990Clarifying confusion: the confusion assessment methodA new method for detection of delirium. Ann Intern Med113941948Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Granger, CV, Albrecht, GL, Hamilton, BB 1979Outcome of comprehensive medical rehabilitation: measurement by PULSES profile and the Barthel IndexArch Phys Med Rehabil60145154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Charlson, ME, Pompei, P, Ales, KL,  et al. 1987A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validationJ Chronic Dis40373383CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Folstein, MF, Folstein, SE, McHugh, PR 1975“Mini-mental state”. A practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinicianJ Psychiatr Res12189198CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Erkinjuntti, T, Kurz, A, Gauthier, S,  et al. 2002Efficacy of galantamine in probable vascular dementia and Alzheimer’s disease combined with cerebrovascular disease: a randomised trialLancet35912831290CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Prieto, L, Alonso, J, Viladrich, MC,  et al. 1996Scaling the Spanish version of the Nottingham Health Profile: evidence of limited value of item weightsJ Clin Epidemiol493138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mckenna, SP, Hunt, SM, McEwen, J 1981Weighting the seriousness of perceived health using Thurstone’s method of paired comparisonsInt J Epidemiol109397PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lautenschlager, GJ 1989ALPHATST: Testing for differences in values of coefficient alphaAppl Psychol Measurement13284Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bonett, DG 2003Sample size requirements for comparing two alpha coefficientsAppl Psychol Measurement277274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    SPSS Inc.1986SPSS X User’s Guide2McGraw-HillChicagoGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Scientific Advisory Committee of the Medical Outcomes Trust2002Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: attributes and review criteriaQual Life Res11193205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Guyatt, GH, Eagle, DJ, Sackett, B,  et al. 1993Measuring quality of life in the frail elderlyJ Clin Epidemiol4614331444CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eva Baró
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Montse Ferrer
    • 1
  • Olga Vázquez
    • 4
  • Ramón Miralles
    • 3
    • 4
  • Angels Pont
    • 1
  • Asunción Esperanza
    • 4
  • Antoni Ma Cervera
    • 4
  • Jordi Alonso
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Health Services Research UnitInstitut Municipal d’Investigació Mèdica, IMIM-IMASBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Health Outcomes Research Department, 3D Health ResearchBarcelonaSpain
  3. 3.Universidad Autónoma de BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  4. 4.Geriatric Department of the Centro Geriátrico Municipal–Hospital de la Esperanza–Hospital del MarInstituto de Atención Geriátrica y Sociosanitaria (IAGS) IMASBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations