Purpose The aims of this study were to investigate (1) the extent to which response shift occurs among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) after coronary revascularization, (2) whether the... Show morePurpose The aims of this study were to investigate (1) the extent to which response shift occurs among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) after coronary revascularization, (2) whether the assessment of changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL), controlled for response shift, yield more valid estimates of changes in HRQoL, as indicated by stronger associations with criterion measures of change, than without controlling for response shift, and (3) if occurrences of response shift are related to patient characteristics. Methods Patients with CAD completed the SF-36 and the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ7) at baseline and 3 months after coronary revascularization. Sociodemographic, clinical and psychosocial variables were measured with the patient version of the New York Heart Association-class, Subjective Significance Questionnaire, Reconstruction of Life Events Questionnaire (RE-LIFE), and HEXACO personality inventory. Oort's Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) approach was used to investigate response shift. Results 191 patient completed questionnaires at baseline and at 3 months after treatment. The SF-36 showed recalibration and reprioritization response shift and the SAQ7 reconceptualization response shift. Controlling for these response shift effects did not result in more valid estimates of change. One significant association was found between reprioritization response shift and complete integration of having CAD into their life story, as indicated by the RE-LIFE. Conclusion Results indicate response shift in HRQoL following coronary revascularization. While we did not find an impact of response shift on the estimates of change, the SEM approach provides a more comprehensive insight into the different types of change in HRQoL following coronary revascularization. Show less
Sawatzky, R.; Kwon, J.Y.; Barclay, R.; Chauhan, C.; Frank, L.; Hout, W.B. van den; ... ; Response Shift Syn 2021
Purpose Results of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to inform healthcare decision-making. Research has shown that response shift can impact PROM results. As part of... Show morePurpose Results of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to inform healthcare decision-making. Research has shown that response shift can impact PROM results. As part of an international collaboration, our goal is to provide a framework regarding the implications of response shift at the level of patient care (micro), healthcare institute (meso), and healthcare policy (macro). Methods Empirical evidence of response shift that can influence patients' self-reported health and preferences provided the foundation for development of the framework. Measurement validity theory, hermeneutic philosophy, and micro-, meso-, and macro-level healthcare decision-making informed our theoretical analysis. Results At the micro-level, patients' self-reported health needs to be interpreted via dialogue with the clinician to avoid misinterpretation of PROM data due to response shift. It is also important to consider the potential impact of response shift on study results, when these are used to support decisions. At the meso-level, individual-level data should be examined for response shift before aggregating PROM data for decision-making related to quality improvement, performance monitoring, and accreditation. At the macro-level, critical reflection on the conceptualization of health is required to know whether response shift needs to be controlled for when PROM data are used to inform healthcare coverage. Conclusion Given empirical evidence of response shift, there is a critical need for guidelines and knowledge translation to avoid potential misinterpretations of PROM results and consequential biases in decision-making. Our framework with guiding questions provides a structure for developing strategies to address potential impacts of response shift at micro-, meso-, and macro-levels. Show less
In medical decision making decisions are made by using cost-utility analyses. Utilities, in cost-utility analyses, are benefits in health estimated by comparing preferences for health states to... Show moreIn medical decision making decisions are made by using cost-utility analyses. Utilities, in cost-utility analyses, are benefits in health estimated by comparing preferences for health states to perfect health and death. Whose__ utilities are used, those given by patients__ or by members of the general public, does matter. Previous research has shown that utilities given by patients are higher compared to those given by members of the public. The main objective of this thesis was to examine mechanisms that have been suggested to explain this gap between health state utilities. Most mechanisms suggested to influence this gap were only marginally explanatory except for focusing illusion and adaption. The public has the tendency to focus on the negative aspects of a health state. On the other hand patients adapt to their illness and take this adaptation into account. Due to focusing illusion of members of the public utilities will become lower whereas adaptation will lead to higher utilities. Whose utilities should be used in decision making depends on whose utilities are most valid. Utilities shaped by focusing illusion are biased however it is a matter of discussion if adaptation leads to invalid utilities. Show less
