Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Understanding the influence of different proxy perspectives in explaining the difference between self-rated and proxy-rated quality of life in people living with dementia: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.
Engel, Lidia; Sokolova, Valeriia; Bogatyreva, Ekaterina; Leuenberger, Anna.
Affiliation
  • Engel L; Monash University Health Economics Group, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 4, 553 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia. lidia.engel@monash.edu.
  • Sokolova V; Monash University Health Economics Group, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Level 4, 553 St. Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
  • Bogatyreva E; School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia.
  • Leuenberger A; School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia.
Qual Life Res ; 33(8): 2055-2066, 2024 Aug.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38656407
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

Proxy assessment can be elicited via the proxy-patient perspective (i.e., asking proxies to assess the patient's quality of life (QoL) as they think the patient would respond) or proxy-proxy perspective (i.e., asking proxies to provide their own perspective on the patient's QoL). This review aimed to identify the role of the proxy perspective in explaining the differences between self-rated and proxy-rated QoL in people living with dementia.

METHODS:

A systematic literate review was conducted by sourcing articles from a previously published review, supplemented by an update of the review in four bibliographic databases. Peer-reviewed studies that reported both self-reported and proxy-reported mean QoL estimates using the same standardized QoL instrument, published in English, and focused on the QoL of people with dementia were included. A meta-analysis was conducted to synthesize the mean differences between self- and proxy-report across different proxy perspectives.

RESULTS:

The review included 96 articles from which 635 observations were extracted. Most observations extracted used the proxy-proxy perspective (79%) compared with the proxy-patient perspective (10%); with 11% of the studies not stating the perspective. The QOL-AD was the most commonly used measure, followed by the EQ-5D and DEMQOL. The standardized mean difference (SMD) between the self- and proxy-report was lower for the proxy-patient perspective (SMD 0.250; 95% CI 0.116; 0.384) compared to the proxy-proxy perspective (SMD 0.532; 95% CI 0.456; 0.609).

CONCLUSION:

Different proxy perspectives affect the ratings of QoL, whereby adopting a proxy-proxy QoL perspective has a higher inter-rater gap in comparison with the proxy-patient perspective.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Quality of Life / Proxy / Dementia / Self Report Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Qual Life Res Journal subject: REABILITACAO / TERAPEUTICA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Australia Country of publication: Netherlands

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Quality of Life / Proxy / Dementia / Self Report Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Qual Life Res Journal subject: REABILITACAO / TERAPEUTICA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Australia Country of publication: Netherlands