Proxy Evaluation of Health-Related Quality of Life: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Multiple Proxy Perspectives

Proxy assessment of health-related quality of life (HRQL) may be sought to substitute for, or to complement, patient self-assessment. The viewpoint from which the proxy is asked to assess the patient is a subtle yet important aspect of proxy assessment. Proxy assessments can be elicited by asking a proxy to assess the patient as they think the patient would respond (ie, proxy-patient perspective) or for the proxy to provide their own perspective on the patient's HRQL (ie, proxy-proxy perspective). In this article, we introduce a framework for differentiating between and understanding HRQL assessments according to rater viewpoint. The difference between patient self-assessment and the proxy-patient perspective is defined as the inter-rater gap, whereas the difference between the proxy-patient and proxy-proxy perspective is described as the intra-proxy gap. The inter-rater gap represents the difference between patient self-assessed HRQL and the proxy ability to comprehend the patient view. The extent to which the proxy-proxy perspective is informative will depend upon the proxy's ability to provide reinforcing or complementary information, ie, represented by the intra-proxy gap, on the HRQL of the patient. We refer to the framework to emphasize the importance of delineating between proxy perspectives in study design and HRQL measurement and to guide inquiries into the validity and interpretation of the meaningfulness of the proxy HRQL assessments from each viewpoint. Future research and use of proxy raters of HRQL in clinical trials, population health monitoring, resource allocation, and clinical management can be informed by explicit consideration of the suggested framework.

[1]  P. Dorman,et al.  Doctors and patients don't agree: cross sectional study of patients' and doctors' perceptions and assessments of disability in multiple sclerosis , 1997, BMJ.

[2]  D. Cook,et al.  Dying in the ICU: perspectives of family members. , 2003, Chest.

[3]  D. Schwappach,et al.  Resource allocation, social values and the QALY: a review of the debate and empirical evidence , 2002, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[4]  George Loewenstein,et al.  Whose quality of life? A commentary exploring discrepancies between health state evaluations of patients and the general public , 2003, Quality of Life Research.

[5]  D. Streiner,et al.  Health‐related Quality of Life in Children with Epilepsy: Development and Validation of Self‐report and Parent Proxy Measures , 2003, Epilepsia.

[6]  D. Feeny,et al.  Use of the Health Utilities Index with stroke patients and their caregivers. , 1997, Stroke.

[7]  F. Guillemin,et al.  Use of the EQ-5D among patients suffering from dementia. , 2003, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[8]  R. Deber,et al.  Family and Physicians' Views of Surrogate Decision-Making: The Roles and How to Choose , 1996, International Psychogeriatrics.

[9]  S Larry Goldenberg,et al.  Assessing Information and Decision Preferences of Men With Prostate Cancer and Their Partners , 2002, Cancer nursing.

[10]  Deborah J. Cook,et al.  Decision-making in the ICU: perspectives of the substitute decision-maker , 2002, Intensive Care Medicine.

[11]  N. Dendukuri,et al.  Proxy Reporting of Quality of Life Using the EQ-5D , 2002, Medical care.

[12]  J. Whyte,et al.  Concordance of patient and family report of neurobehavioral symptoms at 1 year after traumatic brain injury. , 2003, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[13]  R. Doughty,et al.  Measuring health-related quality of life. , 1999, The New Zealand medical journal.

[14]  W. F. Shaffer,et al.  Use of an empathy algorithm with a role-played client. , 1984, Journal of clinical psychology.

[15]  Clara E. Hill,et al.  The current state of empathy research , 1996 .

[16]  R. Hogan,et al.  The theory and measurement of empathy. , 1973 .

[17]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Health utilities in Alzheimer's disease: a cross-sectional study of patients and caregivers. , 1999, Medical care.

[18]  J. Cramer,et al.  Agreement between self reports and proxy reports of quality of life in epilepsy patients , 1995, Quality of Life Research.

[19]  M. Brundage,et al.  Practical issues in assisting shared decision‐making , 2000, Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy.

[20]  C. Moinpour,et al.  Substituting proxy ratings for patient ratings in cancer clinical trials: An analysis based on a Southwest Oncology Group trial in patients with brain metastases , 2000, Quality of Life Research.

[21]  T. M. Kashner,et al.  Patient-proxy response comparability on measures of patient health and functional status. , 1988, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[22]  D. Feeny,et al.  Multiattribute approach to the assessment of health-related quality of life: Health Utilities Index. , 1998, Medical and pediatric oncology.

[23]  J. Hanley,et al.  Proxy use of the Canadian SF-36 in rating health status of the disabled elderly. , 1998, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[24]  Mohamed Abdolell,et al.  Perception of quality of life by patients, partners and treating physicians , 2004, Quality of Life Research.

[25]  E. Caine,et al.  Older Age and the Underreporting of Depressive Symptoms , 1995, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[26]  G. Natvig,et al.  Health-related quality of life and pain beliefs among people suffering from chronic pain. , 2004, Pain management nursing : official journal of the American Society of Pain Management Nurses.

[27]  C. Rogers The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change. , 1992, Psychotherapy.

[28]  K. Calman,et al.  QultIflf ncne ains-a Quality of life in cancer patients -an hypothesis , 2006 .

[29]  S. Bassett,et al.  Reliability of proxy response on mental health indices for aged, community-dwelling women. , 1990, Psychology and aging.

[30]  F. D. de Charro,et al.  Sensitivity and perspective in the valuation of health status: whose values count? , 2000, Health economics.

[31]  N. Aaronson,et al.  Value of caregiver ratings in evaluating the quality of life of patients with cancer. , 1997, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[32]  J. Wit,et al.  The proxy problem: child report versus parent report in health-related quality of life research , 2004, Quality of Life Research.

[33]  P. Dolan,et al.  To what extent can we explain time trade-off values from other information about respondents? , 2002, Social science & medicine.

[34]  S. Dunn,et al.  Patient barriers to optimal cancer pain control , 2003, Psycho-oncology.

[35]  Ruth McCorkle,et al.  From “Death Sentence” to “Good Cancer”: Couples’ Transformation of a Prostate Cancer Diagnosis , 2002, Nursing research.

[36]  D. Osoba,et al.  The use of significant others as proxy raters of the quality of life of patients with brain cancer. , 1997, Medical care.

[37]  Judith A. Hall,et al.  Using Proxies to Evaluate Quality of Life: Can They Provide Valid Information About Patients' Health Status and Satisfaction with Medical Care? , 1989, Medical care.

[38]  P. Dolan,et al.  An inquiry into the different perspectives that can be used when eliciting preferences in health. , 2003, Health economics.

[39]  N. Aaronson,et al.  Comparison of patient and proxy EORTC QLQ-C30 ratings in assessing the quality of life of cancer patients. , 1998, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[40]  A. Glaser,et al.  Influence of proxy respondents and mode of administration on health status assessment following central nervous system tumours in childhood , 2004, Quality of Life Research.

[41]  L. Sharp,et al.  Spouse ratings of quality of life in patients with metastatic prostate cancer of lower socioeconomic status: an assessment of feasibility, reliability, and validity. , 2001, Urology.

[42]  N. Aaronson,et al.  Comparison of patient and spouse assessments of health related quality of life in men with metastatic prostate cancer. , 2001, The Journal of urology.

[43]  E. Bruera,et al.  A survey of mouth pain and dryness in patients with advanced cancer , 2000, Supportive Care in Cancer.

[44]  S. Gadow Clinical subjectivity. Advocacy with silent patients. , 1989, The Nursing clinics of North America.

[45]  A. Barsky,et al.  Forgetting, fabricating, and telescoping: the instability of the medical history. , 2002, Archives of internal medicine.

[46]  B. Penninx,et al.  Self-reports and general practitioner information on the presence of chronic diseases in community dwelling elderly. A study on the accuracy of patients' self-reports and on determinants of inaccuracy. , 1996, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[47]  J. Varni,et al.  The Pediatric Cancer Quality of Life Inventory (PCQL). I. Instrument Development, Descriptive Statistics, and Cross-Informant Variance , 1998, Journal of Behavioral Medicine.

[48]  R. Willke,et al.  Measuring agreement between patient and proxy responses to multidimensional health-related quality-of-life measures in clinical trials. An application of psychometric profile analysis. , 2002, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[49]  M. Maltoni,et al.  Quality of Life of homebound patients with advanced cancer : Assessments by patients, family members, and oncologists , 1996 .

[50]  J. Landgraf Measuring health‐related quality of life in pediatric oncology patients: A brief commentary on the state of the art of measurement and application (discussion) , 1999, International journal of cancer. Supplement = Journal international du cancer. Supplement.

[51]  D. Lollar,et al.  Proxy reliability: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures for people with disability , 2004, Quality of Life Research.

[52]  L. Degner,et al.  Patients With Cancer and Next-of-Kin Response Comparability on Physical and Psychological Symptom Well-being: Trends and Measurement Issues , 2002, Cancer nursing.

[53]  D. Fryback Whose quality of life? or Whose decision? , 2003, Quality of Life Research.

[54]  N. Aaronson,et al.  The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease. , 2002, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[55]  A Simon Pickard,et al.  Agreement Between Patient and Proxy Assessments of Health-Related Quality of Life After Stroke Using the EQ-5D and Health Utilities Index , 2004, Stroke.

[56]  J. Ankri,et al.  Agreement between patients' and proxies' reports of quality of lifein Alzheimer's disease , 2004, Quality of Life Research.

[57]  P Sandercock,et al.  Are proxy assessments of health status after stroke with the EuroQol questionnaire feasible, accurate, and unbiased? , 1997, Stroke.

[58]  R. Adelman,et al.  The Effects of the Presence of a Third Person on the Physician‐Older Patient Medical Interview , 1994, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[59]  D. Hickam,et al.  The Validity of Proxy-Generated Scores as Measures of Patient Health Status , 1991, Medical care.

[60]  J. Rabkin,et al.  Disparities in perceptions of distress and burden in ALS patients and family caregivers , 2004, Neurology.

[61]  M. Limburg,et al.  Assessing quality of life after stroke. The value and limitations of proxy ratings. , 1997, Stroke.

[62]  Stirling Bryan,et al.  EQ-5D in Patients With Dementia An Investigation of Inter-Rater Agreement , 2001, Medical care.

[63]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Children and adult perceptions of childhood asthma. , 1997, Pediatrics.