Living well while providing support: validation of LTCQ-Carer for assessing informal carers' quality of life.

PURPOSE: Despite international policies to support the health and wellbeing of informal (family) caregivers, there is no consensus on how to evaluate the effectiveness of carer support. We aimed to develop and validate a new quality-of-life measure for carers (LTCQ-Carer) and to assess its potential for use within a clinical pathway. METHODS: Psychometric properties of LTCQ-Carer were tested through cognitive interviews (qualitative phase) and a pilot survey (quantitative phase). Participants were family caregivers of people recently diagnosed with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) or dementia, recruited through one of 14 memory clinics in south-east England. They self-completed the new measure and comparative existing measures (EQ-5D, ASCOT-Carer). Ongoing feedback from memory clinic staff on potential use of LTCQ-Carer was collected. RESULTS: Interview participants (n = 10) found all draft items of LTCQ-Carer relevant and prompted inclusion of a new item on 'time to yourself'. Responses from survey participants (n = 107) indicated acceptability (low missing data), high internal reliability (Cronbach's α = 0.95), and a general construct (single factor loadings 0.43-0.86 for all items). Observation of predicted associations with EQ-5D and ASCOT-Carer supported construct validity. Responsiveness requires further testing as evidence was inconclusive. Clinical staff feedback on potential use was positive. CONCLUSION: LTCQ-Carer is a valid new measure for assessing family caregivers' quality of life across broad health and social care domains, expanding the range of high-quality tools for evaluating carer support. When used concurrently with patient assessment, it could highlight carer needs and prompt appropriate family support at the earliest point in the clinical pathway.

Refinement of the Well-being in Pregnancy (WiP) questionnaire: cognitive interviews with women and healthcare professionals and a validation survey.

BACKGROUND: Measuring positive and negative aspects of well-being during pregnancy and childbirth is important for both healthy women and women who are living with long-term health conditions (LTCs). This study aimed to further refine the Well-being in Pregnancy (WiP) questionnaire and to incorporate LTC specific items where appropriate. METHODS: A multi-method study. Cognitive interviews with pregnant or postpartum women (n = 11) and consultations with healthcare professionals (n = 11) and public representatives (n = 4) were conducted to explore the acceptability of existing WiP items and content. Items were refined and subsequently administered on an online survey (n = 768). Item reduction steps and exploratory factor analysis were performed on survey data. Convergent validity was examined using Pearson correlation coefficients to compare relationships with other included validated assessments. RESULTS: Following amendments to three items, the addition of eight core WiP items and five LTC specific items, a total of 25 items were considered relevant and appropriate for use with pregnant women. Analysis of survey data reduced the questionnaire to 12 items measuring three core WiP scales; 1) Concerns over support after birth, 2) Positive pregnancy and, 3) Confidence about motherhood, and a five item standalone LTC specific scale. All scales demonstrated good validity and internal reliability. Scores for the three core scales moderately correlated with established well-being measures indicating that they were measuring similar, yet distinct concepts. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses confirmed good psychometric properties of the refined WiP questionnaire. The use of pregnancy specific well-being measures, such as the WiP, provide a route into asking women in more detail about how their care may be tailored to support them and also facilitates positive conversations with women about how care and experience of pregnancy and childbirth may be enhanced further.

A core outcome set for randomised controlled trials of physical activity interventions: development and challenges.

BACKGROUND: Core outcome sets are standardised sets of outcomes that should be collected and reported for all clinical trials. They have been widely developed and are increasingly influential in clinical research, but despite this, their use in public health has been limited to date. The aim of this study was to develop a core outcome set for public health trials evaluating interventions to promote physical activity in the general adult population. METHODS: The core outcome set was developed using a three-stage approach: stage one: a review of literature to identify potential domains for inclusion in the core outcome set; stage two: a Delphi survey was carried out to reach consensus about which outcome domains to include in the core outcome set; and stage three: a second Delphi survey was conducted to determine how best to measure the outcome domains included in the core outcome set. RESULTS: A classification of 13 outcome domains of physical activity was developed (stage one). Twenty people completed round one of the first Delphi survey (stage two), reaching a consensus to include two domains in the core outcome set, 'device-based level of physical activity' (80.0%, n = 16) and 'health-related quality of life' (70.0%, n = 14). No further consensus on the remaining outcome domains was reached in round two. Nineteen people completed the second Delphi survey (stage three). Participants rated the accelerometer (mean rating = 3.89, on a scale of 1 (do not recommend) to 5 (highly recommend)) as the best device to measure level of physical activity, and the EQ-5D (73.7%, n = 14) as the most appropriate measure of health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: This study has made progress towards the development of a core outcome set for use in physical activity trials, however, there was limited consensus about which domains to include. The development of the core outcome set was challenged by the need for trial-specific outcomes, and the complexities of collecting, processing and reporting device-based data.

Use of the Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire (LTCQ) for monitoring health-related quality of life in people affected by cognitive impairment including dementia: pilot study in UK memory clinic services.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to validate the Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire (LTCQ) among patients using memory clinic services in England. LTCQ is a short self-administered measure of 'living well with long-term conditions' that has not been previously tested in patients with cognitive impairment. METHODS: The mixed-methods study included cognitive interviews to test the comprehensibility and content validity of LTCQ from the patient's perspective, followed by a pilot survey to test the measure's internal consistency, construct validity, structural validity, and responsiveness. Participants were recruited through memory clinics following a diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment or dementia. RESULTS: Interview respondents (n = 12) all found LTCQ's content relevant, with only minor formatting modifications required. Among survey respondents (n = 105), most patients (86%) were able to self-report answers to LTCQ. High multimorbidity among the sample was associated with reduced LTCQ and EQ-5D scores. Internal consistency of LTCQ was high (Cronbach's α = 0.93), no floor or ceiling effects were observed, and missing data levels were low. Factor analysis results further supported LTCQ's structural validity, and predicted positive correlation with EQ-5D indicated construct validity. Score changes observed in a four-month follow-up survey (n = 61) are suggestive of LTCQ's responsiveness. CONCLUSION: LTCQ is a valid means of assessing health-related quality of life for people living with cognitive impairment (including dementia) in the early period of support following diagnosis. Owing to high levels of multimorbidity in this patient population, LTCQ offers an advantage over dementia-specific measures in capturing the cumulative impact of all LTCs experienced by the patient.

Exploring the use of health and wellbeing measures during pregnancy and the first year following birth in women living with pre-existing long-term conditions: qualitative interviews with women and healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: One way in which care for pregnant and postpartum women living with long-term health conditions (LTCs) may be improved is through the adoption of standardised measures to provide evidence of health outcomes and wellbeing from the woman's perspective. AIM: The study explores the views of pregnant and postpartum women living with LTCs, and healthcare professionals to better understand the potential value of using standardised health and wellbeing measures within this patient population. METHODS: Qualitative semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted to explore the perceived value of using measures with pregnant and postpartum women living with LTCs within maternity services. Participants were asked to provide feedback on three exemplar measures: the Long Term Conditions Questionnaire, the Wellbeing in Pregnancy Questionnaire and the EuroQol EQ-5D-5L instrument. Thematic analysis was used in the analysis of the transcripts. RESULTS: Eleven women and 11 healthcare professionals took part in semi-structured interviews. Analysis identified five themes as relevant to the use of measures within maternity services: 1) Improving care, 2) Assessing outcomes, 3) Interpretation and application of data, 4) Engagement challenges and implementation and, 5) Women and healthcare professionals alignment. CONCLUSIONS: Despite varying prior experience and expressing some questions about implementation, respondents were cautiously positive about the use of standardised health and wellbeing measures. Their use offers the opportunity for both affected women and healthcare professionals caring for them to collectively identify and assess important areas of unmet needs and improve outcomes. Incorporating the perspectives of women with LTC's will help bring awareness to elements of women centred care which health services may seek to address.

Ten outcome measures in forensic mental health: A survey of clinician views on comprehensiveness, ease of use and relevance.

BACKGROUND: Measurement of outcomes in forensic mental health services is essential to ensure that these services are delivering good quality care and treatment. Instruments for outcome measurement should cover all important domains, be easy to implement in a routine clinical context and facilitate transfer of relevant information between clinicians as the patient progresses along a recovery and rehabilitation pathway. AIMS: We sought the views of clinicians on 10 common instruments used as outcome measures in forensic mental health services, especially on their perceived comprehensiveness and ease of use. METHODS: An online survey was used to gather the views of clinicians from a range of professional backgrounds working in forensic mental health services in the United Kingdom. The selected instruments were identified from a previous systematic review of instruments for measuring outcomes in this context. Questions covered comprehensiveness, ease of use, patient involvement, relevance and use for progressing tracking and care planning. RESULTS: Complete responses were received from 229 individuals. The range of respondents either agreeing or strongly agreeing that individual instruments were comprehensive was 6-39%; easy to use 19%-69%; relevant 31%-78%; useful to measure progress 7-70%; and useful for care planning 33-81%. Respondents reported that, for each of the 10 instruments, full involvement of patients varied between 3% and 22%; partial involvement 12-45%, patients informed, but not involved 11%-28%; and patients not involved or informed 21%-64%. CONCLUSIONS: The Health of the Nation Outcome Scale Secure, the only instrument designed as an outcome measure, is not regarded by clinicians as useful in that respect and the majority of clinicians do not inform patients they are using it. Clinicians appear most familiar with the Historical Clinical Risk 20 (HCR-20), which some respondents considered potentially useful as a progress measure but with limited patient involvement. Most respondents did not think that the HCR-20 is comprehensive. There is a need for outcome measures that are comprehensive, easy to use and have adequate patient involvement in their development and rating.

The clinical and cost-effectiveness of total versus partial knee replacement in patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis (TOPKAT): 5-year outcomes of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Late-stage isolated medial knee osteoarthritis can be treated with total knee replacement (TKR) or partial knee replacement (PKR). There is high variation in treatment choice and little robust evidence to guide selection. The Total or Partial Knee Arthroplasty Trial (TOPKAT) therefore aims to assess the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of TKR versus PKR in patients with medial compartment osteoarthritis of the knee, and this represents an analysis of the main endpoints at 5 years. METHODS: Our multicentre, pragmatic randomised controlled trial was done at 27 UK sites. We used a combined expertise-based and equipoise-based approach, in which patients with isolated osteoarthritis of the medial compartment of the knee and who satisfied general requirements for a medial PKR were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive PKR or TKR by surgeons who were either expert in and willing to perform both surgeries or by a surgeon with particular expertise in the allocated procedure. The primary endpoint was the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) 5 years after randomisation in all patients assigned to groups. Health-care costs (in UK 2017 prices) and cost-effectiveness were also assessed. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (ISRCTN03013488) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01352247). FINDINGS: Between Jan 18, 2010, and Sept 30, 2013, we assessed 962 patients for their eligibility, of whom 431 (45%) patients were excluded (121 [13%] patients did not meet the inclusion criteria and 310 [32%] patients declined to participate) and 528 (55%) patients were randomly assigned to groups. 94% of participants responded to the follow-up survey 5 years after their operation. At the 5-year follow-up, we found no difference in OKS between groups (mean difference 1·04, 95% CI -0·42 to 2·50; p=0·159). In our within-trial cost-effectiveness analysis, we found that PKR was more effective (0·240 additional quality-adjusted life-years, 95% CI 0·046 to 0·434) and less expensive (-£910, 95% CI -1503 to -317) than TKR during the 5 years of follow-up. This finding was a result of slightly better outcomes, lower costs of surgery, and lower follow-up health-care costs with PKR than TKR. INTERPRETATION: Both TKR and PKR are effective, offer similar clinical outcomes, and result in a similar incidence of re-operations and complications. Based on our clinical findings, and results regarding the lower costs and better cost-effectiveness with PKR during the 5-year study period, we suggest that PKR should be considered the first choice for patients with late-stage isolated medial compartment osteoarthritis. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Rasch analysis of the long-term conditions questionnaire (LTCQ) and development of a short-form (LTCQ-8).

BACKGROUND: The aim of the current study was to evaluate the structural validity of the 20-item long-term conditions questionnaire (LTCQ) and to explore a potential short-form version of the scale using Rasch analysis. METHODS: Data were collected through postal surveys (February 2016-January 2017) from a sample of 1,211 participants diagnosed with at least one long-term condition (LTC). Identified participants were invited through either local authorities for a social care cohort (n = 294) or primary care practices for a health care cohort (n = 917). Participants were mailed a survey, including the LTCQ, demographic questions, a comorbidities measure, and other validated outcome measures. Respondents were invited to complete a follow-up survey including the LTCQ for assessment of reproducibility. RESULTS: The main assumptions of the Rasch model from the LTCQ were fulfilled, although infit and outfit indices indicated some items showed misfit. Misfitted items, items that did not have a preceding set or showed some local dependence were removed one at a time, with the remaining candidate items to form an 8-item short version, the LTCQ-8. The Rasch model for the LTCQ-8 explained 64% variance and had a reliability estimate greater than 0.80. Several items in the LTCQ showed uniform differential item function (DIF) in relation to the number of reported LTCs, age, cohort and type of LTCs, but fewer items exhibited DIF in the LTCQ-8. Spearman's rho correlations between the LTCQ and the LTCQ-8 were strong across the total sample and various subgroups. Correlations between the LTCQ-8 and all reference measures were moderate to strong, and comparable to correlations found between the LTCQ and these measures. CONCLUSIONS: The LTCQ measures a unidimensional construct, and it is therefore acceptable to use a summed total score. The LTCQ-8 also met the assumption of unidimensionality and had comparable construct validity with the LTCQ. Additional validation is required in an independent sample.

Estimating EQ-5D utilities based on the Short-Form Long Term Conditions Questionnaire (LTCQ-8).

PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to develop a mapping algorithm for estimating EuroQoL 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) utilities from responses to the Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire (LTCQ), thus increasing LTCQ's potential as a comprehensive outcome measure for evaluating integrated care initiatives. METHODS: We combined data from three studies to give a total sample of 1334 responses. In each of the three datasets, we randomly selected 75% of the sample and combined the selected random samples to generate the estimation dataset, which consisted of 1001 patients. The unselected 25% observations from each dataset were combined to generate an internal validation dataset of 333 patients. We used direct mapping models by regressing responses to the LTCQ-8 directly onto EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L utilities as well as response (or indirect) mapping to predict the response level that patients selected for each of the five EQ-5D-5L domains. Several models were proposed and compared on mean squared error and mean absolute error. RESULTS: A two-part model with OLS was the best performing based on the mean squared error (0.038) and mean absolute error (0.147) when estimating the EQ-5D-5L utilities. A multinomial response mapping model using LTCQ-8 responses was used to predict EQ-5D-5L responses levels. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a mapping algorithm for estimating EQ-5D utilities from LTCQ responses. The results from this study can help broaden the applicability of the LTCQ by producing utility values for use in economic analyses.

Measures for the integration of health and social care services for long-term health conditions: a systematic review of reviews.

BACKGROUND: As people are living longer with higher incidences of long-term health conditions, there is a move towards greater integration of care, including integration of health and social care services. Integrated care needs to be comprehensively and systematically evaluated if it is to be implemented widely. We performed a systematic review of reviews to identify measures which have been used to assess integrated care across health and social care services for people living with long-term health conditions. METHODS: Four electronic databases (PUBMED; MEDLINE; EMBASE; Cochrane library of systematic reviews) were searched in August 2018 for relevant reviews evaluating the integration of health and social care between 1998 and 2018. Articles were assessed according to apriori eligibility criteria. A data extraction form was utilised to collate the identified measures into five categories. RESULTS: Of the 18 articles included, system outcomes and process measures were most frequently identified (15 articles each). Patient or carer reported outcomes were identified in 13 articles while health outcomes were reported in 12 articles. Structural measures were reported in nine articles. Challenges to measuring integration included the identification of a wide range of potential impacts of integration, difficulties in comparing findings due to differences in study design and heterogeneity of types of outcomes, and a need for appropriate, robust measurement tools. CONCLUSIONS: Our review revealed no shortage of measures for assessing the structures, processes and outcomes of integrated care. The very large number of available measures and infrequent use of any common set make comparisons between schemes more difficult. The promotion of core measurement sets and stakeholder consultation would advance measurement in this area.

Measuring the benefits of the integration of health and social care: qualitative interviews with professional stakeholders and patient representatives.

BACKGROUND: Integrated care has the potential to ease the increasing pressures faced by health and social care systems, however, challenges around measuring the benefits for providers, patients, and service users remain. This paper explores stakeholders' views on the benefits of integrated care and approaches to measuring the integration of health and social care. METHODS: Twenty-five semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with professional stakeholders (n = 19) and patient representatives (n = 6). Interviews focused on the benefits of integrated care and how it should be evaluated. Data was analysed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Three overarching themes emerged from the data: (1) integrated care and its benefits, with stakeholders defining it primarily from the patient's perspective; (2) potential measures for assessing the benefits of integration in terms of system effects, patient experiences, and patient outcomes; and (3) broader considerations around the assessment of integrated care, including the use of qualitative methods. CONCLUSIONS: There was consensus among stakeholders that patient experiences and outcomes are the best measures of integration, and that the main measures currently used to assess integration do not directly assess patient benefits. Validated health status measures are readily available, however, a substantial shift in practices is required before their use becomes commonplace.

Validation of the Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire in inflammatory arthritis: a psychometric evaluation.

Objectives: The Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ) is a recently developed Patient Reported Outcome Measure for use across patients with musculoskeletal conditions. This study provides a validation of the MSK-HQ examining construct validity and reliability in inflammatory arthritis. Methods: 287 adults with inflammatory arthritis completed the MSK-HQ and other Patient Reported Outcome Measures at baseline and after 3 months. Construct validity was assessed using item response theory methods. Concurrent validity was considered in relation to the HAQ and EuroQol-5D in all patients, as well as the RA Impact of Disease (RAID), PsA Impact of Disease scales, and AS Quality of Life Questionnaire (ASQoL) in disease subtypes. Results: The MSK-HQ was approximately normally distributed with no evidence of floor or ceiling effects. A unidimensional structure was confirmed. Two items were less weakly related to the latent musculoskeletal health variable, providing some evidence of multidimensionality. Reliability was high (α = 0.93). The total score correlated highly with the HAQ (r = -0.81) and EuroQol-5D index (r = 0.80) in all patients, RAID in RA patients (r = -0.88), PsA Impact of Disease in PsA patients (r = -0.88), and ASQoL in AS patients (r = -0.86). Test-retest reliability was high (rICC = 0.73). Conclusion: This study provides evidence for the validity and reliability of the MSK-HQ in people with inflammatory arthritis. The major advantage of the MSK-HQ is that it is not disease specific and has high content validity in rheumatological conditions. The MSK-HQ score will be of value in clinical rheumatology practice, providing a measure that can be used across disease areas.

Self-efficacy and health-related quality of life: a cross-sectional study of primary care patients with multi-morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Multi-morbidity in chronic long-term conditions is a major concern for health services. Self-management in concert with clinical care forms part of the effective management of multi-morbidity. Self-efficacy is a mechanism through which self-management can be achieved. Quality of life is adversely impacted by multi-morbidity but could be improved by effective self-management. This study examines the relationship between self-efficacy and quality of life in primary care patients with multi-morbidity. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted with primary care patients in England. Potential participants were mailed a questionnaire containing quality of life measures (the EQ-5D-5L and the Long-Term Conditions Questionnaire (LTCQ)), the Disease Burden Impact Scale (DBIS) and the Self-efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease Scale. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance and linear regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationship between quality of life (dependent variable), self-efficacy, and demographic and disease-related variables. RESULTS: The 848 participants living with multi-morbidity reported a mean of 6.46 (SD 3.49) chronic long-term conditions, with the mean number of physical conditions 5.99 (SD 3.34) and mental health conditions 0.47 (SD 0.66). The mean scores were 15.45 (SD 12.00) for disease burden, 0.69 (SD 0.28) for the EQ-5D-5L, 65.44 (SD 23.66) for the EQ-VAS, and 69.31 (SD 21.77) for the LTCQ. The mean self-efficacy score was 6.69 (SD 2.53). The regression models were all significant at p < 0.001 (adjusted R2 > 0.70). Significant factors in all models were self-efficacy, disease burden and being permanently sick or disabled. Other factors varied between models, with the most notable being the presence of a mental health condition in the LTCQ model. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-morbid primary care patients with lower self-efficacy and higher disease burden have lower quality of life. Awareness of self-efficacy levels among patients with multi-morbidity may help health professionals identify patients who are in need of enhanced self-management support. Providing self-management support for chronic disease has been hailed as a hallmark of good care. Higher self-efficacy may lead to enhanced quality of life in multi-morbidity.

Predictors of activity and participation across neurodegenerative conditions: a comparison of people with motor neurone disease, multiple sclerosis and Parkinson's disease.

BACKGROUND: Comparisons between neurological conditions have the potential to inform service providers by identifying particular areas of difficulty experienced by affected individuals. This study aimed to identify predictors of activity and participation in people with motor neurone disease (MND), people with multiple sclerosis (MS) and people with Parkinson's Disease (PD). METHODS: The Oxford Participation and Activities Questionnaire (Ox-PAQ) and Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Survey (MOS SF-36) were administered by postal survey to 386 people with a confirmed diagnosis of MND, MS or PD. Data analyses focused on stepwise regression analyses in order to identify predictors of activity and participation in the three conditions assessed. RESULTS: Three hundred and thirty four participants completed the survey, a response rate of 86.5%. Regression analyses identified multiple predictors of activity and participation dependent on Ox-PAQ domain and disease group, the most prominent being social and physical functioning as measured by the MOS SF-36. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that the physical and social consequences of neurological illness are of greatest relevance to people experiencing the conditions assessed. Whilst the largely inevitable physical implications of disease take hold, emphasis should be placed on the avoidance of social withdrawal and isolation, and the maintenance of social engagement should become a significant priority.

The context of coping: a qualitative exploration of underlying inequalities that influence health services support for people living with long-term conditions.

Coping with chronic illness encapsulates both practical and emotional aspects of living life in relation to one's long-term health condition(s). Dominant health psychology approaches for understanding coping, which underpin a more recent policy discourse on 'self-management', focus sharply on the person affected by illness and potentially mask the influence of overarching social structure. In this paper we draw on qualitative interviews with 48 people living with long-term conditions (LTCs), in order to highlight the role that structural configurations such as healthcare systems may play in either helping or hindering people's efforts to cope with chronic illness. We argue that coping is a social process in which health and related services, situated within their wider political-economic contexts, play an active role in shaping people's attempts to live well with LTCs. More specifically, health systems are sites of social and cultural capital exchange that can differentially mobilise coping resources through access, continuity of care, and coordination across services. Whilst it is essential to recognise the personal agency of people living with chronic illness, it is also vital to acknowledge the underlying inequalities that affect the ways in which services can support such resourcefulness.

Treatment outcomes in schizophrenia: qualitative study of the views of family carers.

BACKGROUND: Schizophrenia is a complex, heterogeneous disorder, with highly variable treatment outcomes, and relatively little is known about what is important to patients. The aim of the study was to understand treatment outcomes informal carers perceive to be important to people with schizophrenia. METHOD: Qualitative interview study with 34 individuals and 8 couples who care for a person with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed by a thematic framework based approach. RESULTS: Carers described well-recognised outcomes of importance, alongside more novel outcomes relating to: Safety (of the patient/others); insight (e.g. into non-reality of psychotic phenomena); respite from fear, distress or pain; socially acceptable behaviour; getting out of the house; attainment of life milestones; changes in personality and/or temperament; reduction of vulnerability to stress; and several aspects of physical health. CONCLUSIONS: These findings have the potential to inform the development of patient- or carer- focused outcome measures that take into account the full range of domains that carers feel are important for patients.

The role of life context and self-defined well-being in the outcomes that matter to people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: Conduct a deep exploration of the outcomes that matter to people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia and understand from their perspective how these outcomes can be achieved. SAMPLE AND METHODS: In-depth qualitative interviews were conducted with 22 people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia. Interviews were analysed using thematic frameworks, and a realist informed theories of change approach. RESULTS: Our study revealed the potential causal relationships between the context of a person's life, short-term goals and long-term outcomes. We provide a nuanced and detailed exploration of outcomes that matter for people with schizophrenia in relation to self-defined well-being. Achieving life milestones, feeling safe and outcomes related to improved physical health along with employment, a positive sense of self and psychosocial outcomes, were highly valued. For short- and long-term outcomes to be achieved, individuals required medication with minimal side-effects, cognitive behavioural therapy, family/social support and meaningful activities in their lives. Well-being was influenced by life context and short- and long-term outcomes, but in a circular nature also framed what short-term goals could be achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Working with people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia to identify and achieve better outcomes will necessitate a person-centred approach. This will require an appreciation of the relationship between the statutory and non-statutory resources that are available and a consideration of an individual's current well-being status. This approach acknowledges personal strengths and encourages ownership of goals and supports self-management.

The Oxford knee score and its subscales do not exhibit a ceiling or a floor effect in knee arthroplasty patients: an analysis of the National Health Service PROMs data set.

PURPOSE: In this study, we examined whether the OKS demonstrated a floor or a ceiling effect when used to measure the outcome of knee replacement surgery in a large national cohort. METHODS: NHS PROMs database, containing pre- to 6 month post-operative OKS on 72,154 patients, mean age 69 (SD 9.4), undergoing knee replacement surgery, was examined to establish the proportion of patients achieving top or bottom OKS values pre- and post-operatively. RESULTS: Pre-operatively, none of patients achieved the maximum/'best' (48) and minimum (0) scores. Post-operatively, no patients (0 %) achieved the minimum/'worst' score, but the percentage achieving the maximum score increased to 2.7 %. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that the highest post-operative overall ceiling percentage was 3 %, in a subgroup of patients between 60 and 79 years of age and 13.7 % in a group of patients who had a pre-operative OKS above 41. Furthermore, 10.8 % of patients achieved the top post-operative OKS-PCS and 4.7 % top post-operative OKS-FCS. CONCLUSION: Based on NHS PROMs data, the OKS does not exhibit a ceiling or floor effect overall, or for both its pain and function subscales, and remains a valid measure of outcomes for patients undergoing TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Large-scale retrospective observations study, Level II.