Quality of Life Research

, Volume 14, Issue 4, pp 911–922 | Cite as

How much do doctors use quality of life information in primary care? Testing the Trans-Theoretical Model of behaviour change

  • Suzanne M. Skevington
  • Rachel Day
  • Alison Chisholm
  • Paul Trueman


This study aimed to find out whether General Practitioners (GPs) use quality of life (QOL) information in primary care, to explore their reasoning and to assess any barriers to use. A second purpose was to see whether the Trans-Theoretical Model (TTM) of behaviour change could be applied to doctor’s use of QOL information in primary care. A representative, cross-sectional sample of 800 GPs was approached in a national postal survey; 280 (38%) provided qualitative and quantitative information. Most GPs said that QOL was interesting and important. Users had seen more information and scales, and were more aware of its uses; only 8% had ever used formal standardised questionnaires. The main barriers to implementation were a shortage of time and information, and experience with using QOL assessment. A sizable minority wanted to know more. Seventy-one percent would use QOL to monitor treatment effectiveness. The five stages of the TTM were used to identify whether GP’s were predisposed to use QOL information from their knowledge levels and values. While there was some support for the model, the TTM did not sensitively and reliably discriminate between users and non-users on all variables, and so has limited value here.


Clinical practice Doctors Primary care Quality of life Trans-Theoretical Model 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bowling, A. 1995Measuring Disease: A review of Disease-specific Quality of Life Measurement ScalesOpen University PressBuckinghamGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fallowfield, L. 1990The Quality of Life: The Missing Measurement in Health CareSouvenier PressLondonGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spilker, B. 1996Quality of life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials2Lippincott-RavenPhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Addington-Hall, J, Kalra, L. 2001Who should be measuring quality of life?Br Med J32214171420Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carr, AJ, Higginson, IJ. 2001Are quality of life measures patient-centred?Br Med J32213571360Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Morris, J, Perez, D, McNoe, B. 1998The use of quality of life data in clinical practiceQual Life Res78591PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Taylor, KM, Macdonald, KG, Bezjak, A, Ng, P, Petrillo, AD. 1996Physician’s perspective on quality of life: An exploratory study of oncologistsQual Life Res5514PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Detmar, SB, Aaronson, NK. 2000Quality of life assessment in daily clinical oncology practice: A feasibility studyEur J Cancer3411811186Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Detmar, SB, Aaronson, NK, Wever, LDV, Muller, M, Schornagel, JR. 2000How are you feeling? Who wants to know? Patient’s and oncologist’s preferences for discussing health-related quality of life issuesJ Clin Oncol1832953301PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Taenzer, P, Speca, M, Atkinson, MJ,  et al. 1997Computerised quality of life screening in an oncology clinicCancer Prac5168175Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Salek, S, Pratheepawanit, N, Finlay, IG. 2000Use of quality of life outcomes in routine assessment of patients with cancer: Breaking the barriersOncology Economics14246Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Royal College of General Practitioners. General Practitioner workload. RCGP Information sheets No.3, August, 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Prochaska, JO, DiClemente, CC, Norcross, JC. 1992In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behavioursAme Psychol4711021114Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rutter, D., Quine, L. 2002Chapter 1 IntroductionRutter, D.Quine, L. eds. Changing Health Behaviour: Intervention and Research with Social Cognition ModelsOpen University PressBuckinghamGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sutton, S. 2001A critical review of the transtheoretical model applied to smokingNorman, P.Abraham, C.Conner, M. eds. Understanding and Changing Health Behaviour: From Health Beliefs to Self-regulationHarwoodAmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rosen, CS. 2000Is the sequencing of change processes by stage consistent across health problems?Health Psychol9172180Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weinstein, ND, Rothman, AJ, Sutton, SR. 1998Stage theories of health behaviour: Conceptual and methodological issuesHealth Psychol17290299PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    The WHOQOL Group1998The World Health Organisation’s Quality of Life assessment (WHOQOL): Development and general psychometric propertiesSoc Sci Med4615691585Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Straus, SE, Sackett, DL. 1998Using research findings in clinical practiceBr Med J317339342Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Smith, R. 1996What clinical information do doctors need?Br Med J31310621068Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Saunders, C, Baum, M, Fallowfield, L. 1998Quality of life assessments may help some patientsBr Med J317147Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Suzanne M. Skevington
    • 1
  • Rachel Day
    • 1
  • Alison Chisholm
    • 1
  • Paul Trueman
    • 1
  1. 1.WHO Centre for the Study of Quality of Life, Department of PsychologyUniversity of BathBathUK

Personalised recommendations