Development and validation of a revised trauma-specific quality of life instrument
- PMID: 31626032
- DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000002505
Development and validation of a revised trauma-specific quality of life instrument
Abstract
Background: The National Academies of Science has called for routine collection of long-term outcomes after injury. One of the main barriers for this is the lack of practical trauma-specific tools to collect such outcomes. The only trauma-specific long-term outcomes measure that applies a biopsychosocial view of patient care, the Trauma Quality-of-Life (T-QoL), has not been adopted because of its length, lack of composite scores, and unknown validity. Our objective was to develop a shorter version of the T-QoL measure that is reliable, valid, specific, and generalizable to all trauma populations.
Methods: We used two random samples selected from a prospective registry developed to follow long-term outcomes of adult trauma survivors (Injury Severity Score ≥9) admitted to three level I trauma centers. First, we validated the original T-QoL instrument using the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) version 2.0 and Breslau post-traumatic stress disorder screening (B-PTSD) tools. Second, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis to reduce the length of the original T-QoL instrument, and using a different sample, we scored and performed internal consistency and validity assessments of the revised T-QoL (RT-QoL) components.
Results: All components of the original T-QoL were significantly correlated negatively with the B-PTSD and positively with the SF-12 mental and physical composite scores. After confirmatory factor analysis, a three-component structure using 18 items (six items/component) most appropriately represented the data. Each component in the revised instrument demonstrated a high level of internal consistency (Cronbach's α ≥0.8) and correlated negatively with the B-PTSD and positively with the SF-12, demonstrating concurrent validity. In addition, each of the RT-QoL components was able to distinguish between individuals based on their work status, with those who have returned to work reporting better health.
Conclusion: This more practical RT-QoL measure greatly increases the ability to evaluate long-term outcomes in trauma more efficiently and meaningfully, without sacrificing the validity and psychometric properties of the original instrument.
Level of evidence: Prognostic and epidemiological, level III.
References
-
- Durham R, Pracht E, Orban B, Lottenburg L, Tepas J, Flint L. Evaluation of a mature trauma system. Ann Surg. 2006;243(6):775–785.
-
- Dutton RP, Stansbury LG, Leone S, Kramer E, Hess JR, Scalea TM. Trauma mortality in mature trauma systems: are we doing better? An analysis of trauma mortality patterns, 1997–2008. J Trauma. 2010;69(3):620–626.
-
- Egol KA, Tolisano AM, Spratt KF, Koval KJ. Mortality rates following trauma: The difference is night and day. J Emerg Trauma Shock. 2011;4(2):178–183.
-
- Rios-Diaz AJ, Herrera-Escobar JP, Lilley EJ, et al. Routine inclusion of long-term functional and patient-reported outcomes into trauma registries: the FORTE project. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017;83(1).
-
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and M. Berwick D, Downey A, Cornett E, eds. In: A National Trauma Care System: Integrating Military and Civilian Trauma Systems to Achieve Zero Preventable Deaths After Injury. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2016.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials