Skip to main content

Table 1 Study characteristics and methodological aspects of follow-up studies measuring health-related quality of life of injury patients (in order of nr of HRQL instruments used - bold author names are studies of children)

From: A systematic review of studies measuring health-related quality of life of general injury populations

Author, year, country Study population HRQL instrument
(mode of administration)
Follow up
(time points and response rates)
Changes over time Predictors for HRQL
Meerding, 2004, Netherlands [35] ED and/or admitted
Age 15+
(n = 4639)
EQ-5D
(Self-completed)
2 months (39%)
5 months (24%)
9 months (12%)
Improvements between 2 and 5 months, no further improvement between 5 and 9 months HRQL associated with body region injured
Polinder, 2005, Netherlands [36] ED and/or admitted
Age 5-14
(n = 1221)
EQ-5D
(Self-completed, age < 13 proxy)
2.5 month (43%)
5 months (31%)
6 months (30%)
Improvements between 2.5 and 5 months, and between 5 and 9 months Hospital admission and female gender were predictive for long-term HRQL
Polinder, 2007, Netherlands [37] ED and/or admitted
Age: >14
(n = 8564)
EQ-5D
(Self-completed)
2.5 month (37%)
5 months (28%)
9 months (27%)
24 months (21%)
Improvement among non admitted patients until 5 months, and among admitted patients until 24 months Hospitalization, age and sex (females), type of injury and comorbidity were significant predictors of poor functioning in the long term
Vasquez, 1996, Spain [56] Admitted ICU patients
(n = 351)
GOS
(Self-completed)
Admission
1 year
2 year (% not available)
Quality of life improved the first year and between 1 and 2 years, but after 2 years still below pre-admission summary scores Long-term HRQL was associated with age, injury severity, and previous quality of life
Hetherington, 1995, UK [28] Trauma helicopter patients
(n = 100)
FIM
(Face to face interviews)
Acute
3 months
6 months (93%)
Improvements in mobility and self care between 3 and 6 months HRQL associated with length of hospital stay
Gofin, 1997, Israel [57] Age 4-17
(n = 281)
ICIDH
(Telephone parent interviews)
Immediately
6 months (85%)
Improvements until 6 months after injury HRQL is positively associated with ISS
Gofin, 1995, Israel [58] Age 0-17
(n = 432)
ICIDH
(Telephone parent interviews)
Immediately
6 months (85%)
Improvements until 6 months after injury HRQL associated with child's age and parental proxy age
Holbrook, 1998, US [14] >24 hours admitted in trauma center
Age 18+
GCS >11
(n = 1048)
QWB-scale
(Face to face interviews)
Pre-injury
Discharge
6 months (79%)
Significant degree of functional limitations at discharge compared to pre-injury scores. Post-injury depression, PTSD, serious extremity injury, and length of stay were significant predictors of HRQL
Holbrook, 1999, US [15] >24 hours admitted in trauma center
Age 18+
GCS >11
(n = 1048)
QWB-scale
(Face to face interviews)
Pre-injury
Discharge (79%)
12 months (79%)
18 months (74%)
Improvement between discharge and 12 months, but no improvements between 12 and 18 months. Post-injury depression, PTSD, serious extremity injury, and intensive care unit days were significant independent predictors of HRQL
Holbrook, 2004, US [16] >24 hours admitted in trauma center
Age 18+
GCS >11
(n = 1048)
QWB-scale
(Face to face interviews)
Discharge (79%)
6 months (79%)
12 months (74%)
18 months (74%)
Improvement between 6 and 12 months Gender (women) was a significant independent predictors of HRQL at all follow-up time points
Gabbe, 2007, Australia [31] Admitted
Age 18 -64
(n = 1033)
SF-12
(Telephone interviews)
Pre-injury
12 months (69%)
After 12 months patients were not returned to their pre-injury status Compensable patients were more likely than non-compensable patients to report moderate to severe HRQL
Brenneman, 1997, Canada [59] Admitted
ISS >10
(N = 195)
SF-36
(Telephone interviews)
Discharge (56%)
12 months (44%)
Improvements between discharge and 12 months Better scores on 7 dimensions of the SF-36 for patients who returned to work
Michaels, 1999, US [20] Admitted to trauma centre
Age 18+
(n = 247)
SF-36
(Self-completed)
Admission (100%)
6 months (75%)
12 months (51%)
Improvements between baseline and 6 months, and between 6 and 12 months Mental health (PTSD) is an independent predictor of HRQL
Kopjar, 1996, Norway [60] Treated for injury
Age 16-78
(n = 775)
SF-36
(Self-completed)
6-10 weeks (61%)
24-28 weeks (63%)
Improvements between 2 and six months HRQL associated with activity restrictions
Macpherson, 2003, Canada [39] Hospital inpatients
Age 2-15
ISS >12
(n = 489)
WeeFIM
(Telephone interviews)
Discharge
6 months (73%)
Improvement between discharge and 6 months Injury mechanism is an independent predictor of HRQL
Aitken, 2002, US [11] Admitted to children's hospital
Age 3-18
ISS > 3
(n = 310)
CHQ PF-50, WeeFIM
(Parent interview, child Self-completed)
Discharge 63%)
1 month (56%)
6 months (45%)
Improvements between 1 and 6 months HRQL associated with level of injury severity
Winthrop, 2005, US [21] Admitted
Age 1-18
ISS > 8
(n = 180)
CHQ, FIM
(Face-to-face interviews)
Discharge (90%)
1month
6 months (87%)
12 months
Improvements between baseline and 1 month, and between 1 and 6 months HRQL associated with injury severity
Baldry Currens, 2000, UK [24, 25] Survivors of major trauma Admitted >3 days
Age 5+
(n = 251)
FIM, GOS
(Telephone interviews)
3 months (80%)
6 months
12 months
> 24 months
Improvements between 3 and 6 months
No further improvement between 6 months and 1 year
HRQL associated with major vs. minor injury and body region injured
Gillen, 2004, US [13] Age 20+
(n = 114)
SF-36, HAQ
(Telephone interviews)
1 week
2 weeks
1 month
3 months (79%)
Improvements between 1 week and 2 weeks, between 2 weeks and 1 month, and between 1 and 3 months. The SF-36 and the HAQ were responsive to clinical changes in varying conditions and the SF-36 was sensitive to changes in traumatic injuries.
Kiely, 2006, US [18] Age 18-55
ISS > 8 and all patients with age 55+
(n = 312)
SF-36, FIM
(Telephone interview or self-completed)
1 month (63%)
6 months (39%)
Improvements between 1 and 6 months post injury Functional status, PTSD, social support, and depression were predictors of HRQL
Soberg, 2007, Norway [43] Admitted to trauma centre
ISS > 15
Age 18-67
(n = 169)
SF-36, WHODASH II
(Self-completed)
6 weeks (62%)
1 year (61%)
2 years (60%)
Improvements, except for mental and general health between 6 wk and1 year. Between 1 and 2 years almost no improvements. Profession, injury severity, pain, and physical, cognitive, and social functioning made independent contributions to WHODAS II 2 years after injury
Evanoff, 2002, US [12] Workers > 5 days workdays lost (n = 934) SF-36, SF-12, DASH short version
(Face to face interviews)
Baseline (33%)
6 months (27%)
Improvement over 6 months, after 6 months continuing HRQL No
Watson, 2005, Australia [33] Admitted
Age 18-74
(n = 221)
SF-36, AQol, SF-6D
(Face-to-face interviews)
Pre-injury
1, 6, 12 weeks
6 months
12 months (84%)
Significant improvement of functional outcome till 6 months; no significant difference in summary scores at 6 and 12 months post-injury The AQoL showed good discrimination between groups for type of injury, body region injured and severity of injury
Watson, 2007, Australia [33] Admitted
Age 18-74
(n = 186)
SF-36, AQol, SF-6D
(Face-to-face interviews)
Pre-injury
12 months (88%)
No difference between summary scores at baseline and 12 months after injury for patients that completely recovered Gender, age, working status were predictors for complete recovery after one year
Gabbe, 2008, Australia [32] Age 15-80
ISS > 15
(n = 243)
FIM, Modified FIM, GOS, GOS-E
(Telephone interviews with participants or care provider)
Discharge
6 months (97%)
Improvement between discharge and 6 months, except for the cognition component of the FIM HRQL associated with discharge destination and head injury vs. no head injury
Sutherland, 2005, UK [29] Admitted
Age 16-70
(n = 200)
SF-36, SF-6D, MFA, GHQ
(Self-completed)
2 months (79%)
6 months (75%)
No improvement between 2 and 6 months No
  1. AMA-guides = American Medical Association guides; BDS = Bull Disability Scale; CFS = Cognitive Function Scale; CHQ PF-50 = Parent Completed version of the CHQ; CHQ = Child Health Questionnaire; EQ5 D = European Quality of life instrument-5 dimensions;; FIM = Functional Independence Measure; GHQ = General Health Questionnaire; GOS = Glasgow Outcome Scale; HAQ = Health Assessment Questionnaire; HOBQ = Health Outcomes Burn Questionnaire for Children; ICIDH2 = 25 item scale for measuring functional outcome by the International Classification of Impairments Disabilities and Handicaps; MFA = Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment; NHP = Nottingham Health Profile; OPCS = Office of Population Census and Surveys national survey of disability in Great Britain; QOL = Satisfaction with Quality of Life instrument; QWB = Quality of Well Being scale; RDS = Rosser Disease Score; RTW = Return To pre-injury Work status; SF-6D = Medical Outcome Study Short Form-6 dimensions; SF-12 = Medical Outcome Study Short Form-12 items; SF-36 = Medical Outcome Study Short form-36 items; SIP = Sickness Impact Profile; TOP = Trauma Outcome Profile; WeeFIM = Pediatric version of the FIM; WODASII = World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule version II; WHOQOL-BREF = short version of the World Health Organization Quality of life.