Use of the QOLIE-31 in Patients with Psychogenic Events
Abstract number :
2.244
Submission category :
Year :
2000
Submission ID :
2562
Source :
www.aesnet.org
Presentation date :
12/2/2000 12:00:00 AM
Published date :
Dec 1, 2000, 06:00 AM
Authors :
Susan L Lannon, Karla L Thompson, Bradley V Vaughn, Kyle J Kalkowski, William H Mills, Univ of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.
RATIONALE: The QOLIE-31(c) is a self-report tool comprised of six sub-scales that measure: seizure worry; emotional well-being; energy/fatigue; cognitive impairment; medication effects; and social function, as well as overall quality of life and health state. Scores are calculated so that higher scores reflect more positive outcomes. The QOLIE-31(c) is used for people with an established diagnosis of epilepsy. However, its use for other patient populations has not been reported. One group in which it might prove useful is the patient population with psychogenic events. METHODS: Beginning 7/1/99, all adult patients admitted for Video-EEG monitoring who were capable of completing a self-report tool were asked to complete the QOLIE-31(c). By 3/1/00, 32 patients completed the tool, 14 did not complete it. The Epilepsy Nurse Clinician scored the tools and, based on their diagnosis at the time of discharge, classified patients into two groups, those with EEG documented epileptic seizures (N=13) and those with psychogenic events (N=19). We conducted a series of pair-wise t-tests using the Statistical Analysis Systems (1988) t-test procedure to compare QOLIE total scale and subscale scores of individuals in the two diagnostic groups. The individual who performed the analyses was blind to diagnosis. RESULTS: Statistically significant group differences were found on two subscales of the QOLIE-31 as well as items measuring overall quality of life and self-reported health states. Individuals with psychogenic events reported significantly less energy, t(30) = 3.46, p < .01, and greater levels of social isolation, t(30) = 2.96, p < .01, than those with epileptic seizures. Individuals with psychogenic etiologies also reported worse overall quality of life, t(30) = 2.6, p < .05, and worse physical health, t(30) = 2.20, p < .05 than those with epileptic events. No other significant group differences were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the QOLIE-31(c) may be useful in helping to differentiate between patients with epileptic seizures and those with psychogenic events. The instrument may also have utility for clarifying diagnostic and treatment issues for individuals with psychogenic events.