Defining novel health-related quality of life domains in lung transplantation: a qualitative analysis
Health-related quality of life (HRQL) domains vary across disease conditions and are determined by standards, values, and priorities internal to patients. Although the clinical goals of lung transplantation are to improve patient survival and HRQL, what defines HRQL in lung transplantation is unknown. Employing a qualitative approach, we aimed to identify HRQL domains important in lung transplantation.
We conducted semi-structured interviews in purposefully sampled lung transplant recipients (n = 8) representing a spectrum of ages, gender, indications for transplantation, and time since transplantation as well as healthcare practitioners representing a spectrum of practitioner types (n = 9). Grounded theory was used to identify HRQL domains important in lung transplantation, building on but going beyond domains already defined in the SF-36, the most commonly used instrument in this population.
In addition to confirming the relevance of the eight SF-36 domains, we identified 11 novel HRQL domains. Palliation of respiratory symptoms was identified as important. After transplant surgery, new HRQL domains emerged including: distressing symptoms spanning multiple organ systems, worry about infection and acute rejection, treatment burden, and depression. Further, patients identified challenges to intimacy, changes in social relationships, and problems with cognitive functioning. Saliently, worry about limited life expectancy was pervasive and impaired life planning.
We found that HRQL in lung transplantation is defined by both generic and transplant-specific domains. Delineating and refining these domains can inform efforts to improve clinical outcomes and HRQL measurement in lung transplantation.
KeywordsLung transplantation Disability Patient-centered outcomes Health-related quality of life Qualitative methods
Health-related quality of life
36-Item short form health survey
Supported in part by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K23 HL111115; JPS) and National Institute on Aging (P30-AG15272; ALS).
Conflict of interest
The authors of this manuscript have no conflicts of interest to disclose.
- 1.Yusen, R. D., Christie, J. D., Edwards, L. B., Kucheryavaya, A. Y., Benden, C., Dipchand, A. I., et al. (2013). The registry of the International society for heart and lung transplantation: Thirtieth adult lung and heart-lung transplant report—2013. Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 32(10), 965–978.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Patrick, D. L., et al. (2011). Content validity—Establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: Part 1—Eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. Value in Health, 14(8), 967–977.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Acaster, S., Cimms, T., & Lloyd, A. (2012). The design and selection of patient-reported outcomes measures for use in patient centered outcomes research. Oxford outcomes. http://www.pcori.org/assets/The-Design-and-Selection-of-Patient-Reported-Outcomes-Measures-for-Use-in-Patient-Centered-Outcomes-Research1.pdf.
- 8.U.S Department of health and human services, food and drug administration. Guidance for industry. Patient-reported outcome measures: Use in medical product development to support labeling claims. Issued December 2009. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf. Accessed June, 2014.
- 10.Stewart, A. L., & Ware, J. E., Jr. (1992). Measuring functioning and well-being: The medical outcomes study approach. Durkam: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
- 14.Charmaz, K. (2003). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. Strategies for qualitative inquiry (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
- 15.Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage. xiii, p. 208.Google Scholar
- 17.Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage. xxiv, 598, p. 65.Google Scholar
- 22.Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007). The Sage handbook of grounded theory (p. 623). London: Sage.Google Scholar
- 23.Strauss, A., Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1997). Grounded theory in practice (p. 280). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
- 39.Reeve, B. B. et al. (2014). Recommended patient-reported core set of symptoms to measure in adult cancer treatment trials. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 106(7), 1−8.Google Scholar
- 42.Orens, J. B., et al. (2006). International guidelines for the selection of lung transplant candidates: 2006 update—A consensus report from the Pulmonary Scientific Council of the International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation. Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 25(7), 745–755.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 46.Eskander, A. et al. (2011). BODE index and quality of life in advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease before and after lung transplantation. The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation, 30(12), 1334–1341.Google Scholar
- 55.Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2005). From cancer patient to cancer survivor: Lost in transition. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar