Quality of Life Research

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 131–135 | Cite as

Validation of a new patient-generated questionnaire for quality of life in an urban sample of elder residents

Brief Communication



To provide evidence for the validity of the Fragebogen zur Lebensqualität multimorbider älterer Menschen (FLQM; English: Quality of life in elders with multimorbidity), a new tool for the assessment of life-satisfaction as a subjective indicator of quality of life in old age.


The FLQM measures overall life-satisfaction based on those self-generated domains in life that are most important to the respondent. Construct validity (correlations with convergent and divergent scales) and differential validity (subgroup differences with respect to age and limitations in everyday functioning) were analyzed in an urban sample of older adults (n = 299; 54.6% male; Mean (age) = 75.65 years, SD = 6.57).


Correlations of FLQM with measures of similar constructs were close (r = 0.35–0.50; p < 0.001). There were no age-group differences. However, subjects with self-reported impairment in functioning scored significantly lower on the FLQM. Also, the relationship between FLQM and self-rated health was close (r = 0.44; p < 0.001).


The FLQM is a valid assessment of older peoples’ life-satisfaction. The focus on domains of utmost individual importance seems to link the FLQM to self-rated health more closely than other ratings of global life-satisfaction. Further investigation into the qualitative information obtained by the FLQM is desirable in order to explain individual compositions of life-satisfaction and overall quality of life.


Quality of life Old age Life-satisfaction Validation study Methods 



The project which inspired this article was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research under Grant Number 01ET0701. It was approved by the ethics committee of Charité—Universitätsmedizin Berlin (Ethikausschuss 1 am Campus Charité—Mitte) under approval number EA2/066/08 on July 14, 2008. The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors.

Supplementary material

11136_2012_115_MOESM1_ESM.doc (36 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 36 kb)


  1. 1.
    Fitzpatrick, R. (1999). Assessment of quality of life as an outcome: Finding measurements that reflect individuals’ priorities. Quality in Health Care, 8(1), 1–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Garratt, A., Schmidt, L., Mackintosh, A., & Fitzpatrick, R. (2002). Quality of life measurement: Bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. British Medical Journal, 324(7351), 1417–1419.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ware, J. E., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30(6), 473–483.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Greiner, W., Weijnen, T., Nieuwenhuizen, M., Oppe, S., Badia, X., Busschbach, J., et al. (2003). A single European currency for EQ-5D health states. Results from a six country study. European Journal of Health Economics, 4(3), 222–231.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Diener, E., & Lucas, R. E. (2000). Subjective emotional well-being. In M. Lewis & J. M. Haviland (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (pp. 325–337). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring quality of life: Economic, social, and subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40(1–2), 189–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lawton, M. P. (1991). A multidimensional view of quality of life in frail elders. In J. E. Birren, J. E. Lubben, J. C. Rowe, & D. E. Deutchman (Eds.), The concept and measurement of quality of life in the frail elderly (pp. 3–27). San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Holzhausen, M., Bornschlegel, U., & Fischer, T. (2009). Patient view in the assessment of quality of life in old age: Potentials and limits. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 42(5), 355–359.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Holzhausen, M., Kuhlmey, A., & Martus, P. (2010). Individualized measurement of quality of life in older adults: Development and pilot testing of a new tool. European Journal of Ageing, 7(3), 201–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Holzhausen, M., Fuchs, J., Busch, M., Ernert, A., Six-Merker, J., Knopf, H., et al. (2011). Operationalizing multimorbidity and autonomy for health services research in aging populations—The OMAHA study. BMC Health Services Research, 11, 47. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-11-47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (2003). Health measurement scales: A practical guide to their development and use. Oxford: University Press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thompson, E. R. (2007). Development and validation of an internationally reliable short-form of the positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS). Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38(2), 227–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Robine, J. M., & Jagger, C. (2003). Creating a coherent set of indicators to monitor health across Europe: The Euro-REVES 2 project. European Journal of Public Health, 13(3 Suppl), 6–14.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    SPSS Inc. (2009). PASW statistics 18, release version 18.0.0. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schwarz, N., & Strack, F. (1991). Evaluating one’s life: A judgment model of subjective well-being. In F. Strack, M. Argyle, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), Subjective well-being: An interdisciplinary perspective (pp. 27–47). Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Biometry and Clinical EpidemiologyCharité—Universitätsmedizin BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations