Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Patterns of responses on health-related quality of life questionnaires among patients with HIV/AIDS

  • Original Articles
  • Published:
Journal of General Internal Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) has become an important facet of HIV/AIDS research. Typically, the unit of analysis is either the total instrument score or subscale score. Developing a typology of responses across various HRQoL measures, however, may advance understating of patients’ perspectives.

Methods

In a multicenter study, we categorized 443 patients’ responses on utility measures (time-tradeoff, standard gamble, and rating scale) and the HIV/AIDS-Targeted Quality of Life (HAT-QoL) scale by using latent profile analysis to empirically derive classes of respondents. We then used linear regressions to identify whether class membership is associated with clinical measures (viral load, CD4, time since diagnosis, highly active antiretroviral therapy [HAART]) and psychosocial function (depressed mood, alcohol use, religious coping).

Results

Six classes were identified. Responses across the HAT-QoL subscales tended to fall into 3 groupings—high functioning (Class 1), moderate functioning (Classes 2 and 3), and low functioning (Classes 4 to 6); utility measures further distinguished individuals among classes. Regression analyses comparing those in Class 1 with those in the other 5 found significantly more symptoms of depression, negative religious coping strategies, and lower CD4 counts among subjects in Class 1. Those in Class 5 had been diagnosed with HIV longer, and members of Class 6 reported significantly less alcohol consumption, had higher viral loads, and were more likely to receive HAART.

Conclusion

Patients with HIV respond differentially to various types of HRQoL measures. Health status and utility measures are thus complementary approaches to measuring HRQoL in patients with HIV.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Leplege A, Hunt, S. The problem of quality of life in medicine. JAMA. 1997; 278: 47–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cella DF. Quality of life: the concept. J Palliat Carc. 1992;8:8–13.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Tsevat J. What do utilities measure? Med Care. 2000;38:160–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Turk DC. The potential of treatment matching for subgroups of patients with chronic pain: lumping versus splitting. Clin J Pain. 2005;21:44–55: discussion 69-72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Turk DC, Rudy TE. Toward an empirically derived taxonomy of chronic pain patients: integration of psychological assessment data. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1988;56:233–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Turk DC, Rudy TE. The robustness of an empirically derived taxonomy of chronic pain patients. Pain. 1990;43:27–35.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Brandwin M, Trask PC, Schwartz SM, Clifford M. Personality predictors of mortality in cardiac transplant candidates and recipients. J Psychosom Res. 2000;49:141–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Bult JR, Bosch JL, Hunink MG Heterogeneity in the relationship between the standard-gamble utility measure and health-status dimensions. Med Decis Making. 1996;16:226–33.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Trask PC, Griffith KA. The identification of empirically derived cancer patient subgroups using psychosocial variables. J Psychosom Res. 2004;57:287–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Turk DC, Okifuji A, Sinclair JD, Starz TW. Pain, disability, and physical functioning in subgroups of patients with fibromyalgia. J Rheumatol. 1996;23:1255–62.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Turk DC, Okifuji A, Sinclair JD, Starz TW. Differential responses by psychosocial subgroups of fibromyalgia syndrome patients to an interdisciplinary treatment. Arthritis Care Res. 1998;11:397–404.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rudy TE, Turk DC, Zaki HS, Curtin HD. An empirical taxometric alternative to traditional classification of temporomandibular disorders. Pain. 1989;36:311–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Turk DC, Sist TC, Okifuji A, et al. Adaptation to metastatic cancer pain, regional/local cancer pain and non-cancer pain: role of psychological and behavioral factors. Pain. 1998;74:247–56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Rudy TE, Turk DC, Kubinski JA, Zaki HS. Differential treatment responses of TMD patients as a function of psychological characteristics. Pain. 1995;61:103–12.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Turk DC, Zaki HS, Rudy TE. Effects of intraoral appliance and biofeedback/stress management alone and in combination in treating pain and depression in patients with temporomandibular disorders. J Prosthet Dent. 1993;70:158–64.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Dennis ML, Wechsberg WM, McDermeit M, Campbell RS, Rasch RR. The correlates and predictive validity of HIV risk groups among drug users in a community-based sample: methodological findings from a multi-site cluster analysis. Eval Program Plann. 2001;24:187–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Mitchell CM, Kaufman CE, Beals J. Identifying diverse HIV risk groups among American Indian young adults: the utility of cluster analysis. AIDS Behav. 2004;8:263–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bult JR, Hunink MG, Tsevat J, Weinstein MC. Heterogeneity in the relationship between the time tradeoff and Short Form-36 for HIV-infected and primary care patients. Med Care 1998;36:523–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ware JE, Jr., Kosinski M, Keller SD. Sf-36 physical and mental health summary scales: a user’s manual. Boston: The Health Institute New England Medical Center; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Magidson JV, Vermunt JK. Latent class models for clustering: a comparison with K-means. Can J Market Res. 2002;20:37–44.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Magidson J, Vermunt JK. Latent class modeling as a probabilistic extension of K-means clustering. Quirk’s Market Res Rev. 2002;20: 77–80.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lubke GH, Muthen B. Investigating population heterogeneity with factor mixture models. Psychol Methods. 2005;10:21–39.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Holmes WC, Shea JA. A new HIV/AIDS-targeted quality of life (HAT-QoL) instrument: development, reliability, and validity. Med Care. 1998; 36:138–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. van Roosmalen MS, Stalmeier PF, Verhoef LC, et al. Randomized trial of a shared decision-making intervention consisting of trade-offs and individualized treatment information for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:3293–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Torrance GW. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J Health Econ. 1986;5:1–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Andresen EM, Malmgren JA, Carter WB Patrick DL. Screening for depression in well older adults: evaluation of a short form of the CES-D (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale). Am J Prev Med. 1994;10:77–84.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Malcolm SE, Ng JJ, Rosen RK, Stone VE An examination of HIV/AIDS patients who have excellent adherence to HAART. AIDS Care 2003;15: 251–61.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Pargament KI, Koenig HG, Perez LM. The many methods of religious coping: development and initial validation of the RCOPE. J Clin Psychol. 2000;56:519–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Pargament KI, Smith BW, Koenig HG, Perez L. Patterns of positive and negative religious coping with major life stressors. J Sci Stud Relig. 1998;37:710–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Chesney MA, Ickovics JR, Chambers DB, et al. Seif-reported adherence to antiretroviral medications among participants in HIV clinical trials: the AACTG adherence instruments. Patient care committee & adherence working group of the outcomes committee of the Adult AIDS Clinical Trials Group (AACTG). AIDS Care. 2000;12:255–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. O’Connor RM, Colder CR. Predicting alcohol patterns in first-year college students through motivational systems and reasons for drinking. Psychol Addict Behav. 2005;19:10–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 2nd ed., New York: Guilford Press; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Arbuckle JL. AMOS (Version 5.0.1). 2003.

  34. Muthen B., Muthen LK. MPlus (Version 3.11). 2004.

  35. SPSS 13.0 for Windows. 2004.

  36. Perkins DO, Leserman J, Stern RA, et al.. Somatic symptoms and HIV infection: relationship to depressive symptoms and indicators of HIV disease. Am J Psychiatry. 1995;152:1776–81.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Pugh K, Riccio M, Jadresic D, et al. A longitudinal study of the neuropsychiatric consequences of HIV-1 infection in gay men. II. Psychological and health status at baseline and at 12-month follow-up. Psychol Med. 1994;24:897–904.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Tsevat J, Sherman SN, McElwee JA, et al. The will to live among HIV-infected patients. Ann Intern Med. 1999;131:194–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Szaflarski M, Ritchey PN, Leonard AC, et al. Modeling the effects of spirituality/religion on patients’ perceptions of living with HIV/AIDS. J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21:S56–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sherman SN, Mrus JM, Yi MS, Feinberg J, Tsevat J. How do patients with HIV/AIDS understand and respond to health value questions? J Gen Intern Med. 2006;21:S28–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Behrens JT. Principles and procedures of exploratory data analysis. Psychological Methods. 1997;2:131–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Pentz MA, Chou CP. Measurement invariance in longitudinal clinical research assuming change from development and intervention. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1994;62:450–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equat Model. 1999;6:1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Veterans Healthcare System of Ohio (VISN 10), Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Ian Kudel, Joseph M. Mrus, Anthony C. Leonard, Susan N. Sherman & Joel Tsevat

  2. Institute for the Study of Health, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Ian Kudel, Joseph M. Mrus, Anthony C. Leonard, Susan N. Sherman & Joel Tsevat

  3. Evaluation Services Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Stacey L. Farber

  4. University of Cincinnati Medical Center, Department of internal Medicine, Cincinnati, OH, USA

    Joseph M. Mrus & Joel Tsevat

Authors
  1. Ian Kudel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stacey L. Farber
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joseph M. Mrus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anthony C. Leonard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Susan N. Sherman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Joel Tsevat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kudel, I., Farber, S.L., Mrus, J.M. et al. Patterns of responses on health-related quality of life questionnaires among patients with HIV/AIDS. J GEN INTERN MED 21 (Suppl 5), S48–S55 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00645.x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1525-1497.2006.00645.x

Key Words

Search

Navigation