IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0193398.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How best to assess quality of life in informal carers of people with dementia; A systematic review of existing outcome measures

Author

Listed:
  • Johanne Dow
  • Jonah Robinson
  • Shannon Robalino
  • Tracy Finch
  • Elaine McColl
  • Louise Robinson

Abstract

Background: In the UK, there are currently 800 000 people living with dementia. This number is expected to double in the next 20 years. Two-thirds of people with dementia live in the community supported by informal carers. Caring for a person with dementia has adverse effects on psychological, physical, social wellbeing and quality of life. The measurement of quality of life of carers of people with dementia is increasingly of interest to health and social care practitioners and commissioners, policymakers, and carers themselves. However, there is lack of consensus on the most suitable instrument(s) for undertaking this. Methods: A systematic review of the literature using COSMIN methodology. Searching of electronic databases (Medline, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science), reference list and citation searching of key papers was undertaken. COSMIN methodology was used to simultaneously extract data from and assess methodological quality of included studies, and make a recommendation for the instrument with the most high quality evidence for its measurement properties. Results: Ten instruments were suitable for inclusion in this review. The Carer well-being and support questionnaire (CWS) has the best quality evidence for the greatest number of measurement of properties. The Caregiver Well-Being Scale is also worthy of consideration. There is not presently a measure which could be recommended for use in economic evaluations, however the Impact of Alzheimer’s Disease on the Caregiver questionnaire (IADCQ) could potentially be used following further investigation of its measurement properties in a representative population. Conclusion: The CWS is the most appropriate instrument to recommend for the assessment of quality of life in informal carers of people with dementia at present. All instruments included in this review would benefit from more rigorous evaluation of their measurement properties.

Suggested Citation

  • Johanne Dow & Jonah Robinson & Shannon Robalino & Tracy Finch & Elaine McColl & Louise Robinson, 2018. "How best to assess quality of life in informal carers of people with dementia; A systematic review of existing outcome measures," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(3), pages 1-18, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0193398
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0193398
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0193398
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0193398&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0193398?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0193398. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.