Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Nov;51(5):949-59.
doi: 10.1016/j.jhep.2009.07.010. Epub 2009 Jul 28.

A review of quality of life instruments used in liver transplantation

Colleen L Jay  1 , Zeeshan Butt, Daniela P Ladner, Anton I Skaro, Michael M Abecassis
Affiliations

A review of quality of life instruments used in liver transplantation

Colleen L Jay et al. J Hepatol. 2009 Nov.

Abstract

With improvements in patient and graft survival after liver transplantation, recipient quality of life (QOL) has become an important focus of patient care and clinical outcomes research. To provide a better understanding of the instruments used to assess QOL in the adult liver transplant population, we conducted a systematic review of the MEDLINE database and Cochrane library. Our review identified 128 relevant articles utilizing more than 50 different QOL instruments. Generic health status instruments are the most commonly used, and among them the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) are the most prevalent. Few studies (16%) included targeted, disease-specific instruments. The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) Quality of Life questionnaire, the Liver Disease Quality of Life questionnaire, and the Chronic Liver Disease questionnaire are the most frequently employed targeted instruments; however, these instruments have been designed to assess QOL in patients with chronic liver disease rather than patients after liver transplantation. The present review focuses on the psychometric properties of the existing QOL instruments and discusses their individual strengths and limitations in evaluating liver transplantation recipients. The lack of a gold-standard QOL instrument for liver transplant recipients is an impediment to cross-study comparisons. We conclude that the development of a QOL instrument specifically for liver transplant recipients will improve QOL assessment in this population leading to a more nuanced understanding of the factors that influence transplant recipients' well-being.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Search strategy and results.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. 2007 Annual Report of the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: Transplant Data 1997−2006. Health Resources and Services Administration, Healthcare Systems Bureau, Division of Transplantation. 2007.
    1. Constitution of World Health Organization World Health Organization. 1948.
    1. Atherton PJ, Sloan JA, Atherton PJ, Sloan JA. Rising importance of patient-reported outcomes. Lancet Oncol. 2006;7:883–884. - PubMed
    1. Leidy NK, Beusterien K, Sullivan E, Richner R, Muni NI. Integrating the patient's perspective into device evaluation trials. Value Health. 2006;9:394–401. - PubMed
    1. Lohr KN, Aaronson NK, Alonso J, Burnam MA, Patrick DL, Perrin EB, et al. Evaluating quality-of-life and health status instruments: development of scientific review criteria. Clin Ther. 1996;18:979–992. - PubMed

Publication types