No abstract

Quality of life (QoL) following a physical trauma is still insufficiently known from a patient perspective. The aim of this study was to qualitatively report perceived changes in QoL after trauma. Focus groups were conducted. Patients admitted to the hospital were eligible for inclusion if they had a lower extremity trauma, severe injuries, or severe traumatic brain injury (TBI). Patients 75 years or older were invited. To analyze the perceived changes in QoL, open coding was used. Patients (n = 20, M = 55 years) reported comparable consequences. In the first month posttrauma, physical limitations, independency, pain, and anxiety predominated. Later, patients experienced problems with acceptance. The patients' feelings of the need to have control over their own situation, their own expectations, and a social network were related to QoL. Compared with the other patient groups, TBI patients reported more psychosocial consequences, and elderly patients reported more difficulties in performing (social) activities. Quality of health care was considered an important aspect in the patients' perceived QoL, and adequate aftercare was missed according to the patients. The impact of a trauma influences QoL in different health domains. Further improving the quality of aftercare may positively influence trauma patients' perceived QoL. These results indicated that TBI patients and elderly patients deserve specific attention regarding QoL.

BackgroundEarly detection of psychosocial problems post-injury may prevent them from becoming chronic. Currently, there is no psychosocial screening instrument that can be used in patients surviving a physical trauma or injury. Therefore, we recently developed a psychosocial screening instrument for adult physical trauma patients, the PSIT. The aim of this study was to finalize and psychometrically examine the PSIT.MethodsAll adult (≥ 18 years) trauma patients admitted to a Dutch level I trauma center from October 2016 through September 2017 without severe cognitive disorders (n = 1448) received the PSIT, Impact of Events Scale-Revised (IES-R), Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory-State (STAI-S), and the World Health Organization Quality of Life-Abbreviated version (WHOQOL-Bref). After 2 weeks, a subgroup of responding participants received the PSIT a second time. The internal structure (principal components analysis, PCA; and confirmatory factor analysis, CFA), internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha, α), test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, ICC), construct validity (Spearman’s rho correlations), diagnostic accuracy (Area Under the Curve, AUC), and potential cut-off values (sensitivity and specificity) were examined.ResultsA total of 364 (25.1%) patients participated, of whom 128 completed the PSIT again after 19.5 ± 6.8 days. Test-retest reliability was good (ICC = 0.86). Based on PCA, five items were removed because of cross-loadings ≥ 0.3. Three subscales were identified: (1) Negative affect (7 items; α = 0.91; AUC = 0.92); (2) Anxiety and Post-Traumatic Stress Symptoms (4 items; α = 0.77; AUC = 0.88); and (3) Social and self-image (4 items; α = 0.79; AUC = 0.92). CFA supported this structure (comparative fit index = 0.96; root mean square error of approximation = 0.06; standardized rood mean square residual = 0.04). Four of the five a priori formulated hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. The following cut-off values represent maximum sensitivity and specificity: 7 on subscale 1 (89.6% and 83.4%), 3 on subscale 2 (94.4% and 90.3%), and 4 on subscale 3 (85.7% and 90.7%).ConclusionThe final PSIT has good psychometric properties in adult trauma patients.

No abstract