Abstract

BackgroundThe widespread international use of the 26-item WHO Quality of Life Instrument (WHOQOL-Bref) necessitates the assessment of its factor structure across cultures. For, alternative factor models may provide a better explanation of the data than the WHO 4- and 6-domain models. The objectives of the study were: to assess the factor structure of the WHOQOL-Bref in a Sudanese general population sample; and use confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and path analysis (PA) to see how well the model thus generated fits into the WHOQOL-Bref data of Sudanese psychiatric patients and their family caregivers.MethodIn exploratory factor analysis (FA) with all items, data from 623 general population subjects were used to generate a 5-domain model. In CFA and PA, the model was tested on the data of 300 psychiatric outpatients and their caregivers, using four goodness of fit (GOF) criteria in Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS). In the path relationships for our model, the dependent variable was the item on overall QOL (OQOL). For the WHO 6-domain model, the general facet on health and QOL was the dependent variable.ResultsTwo of the five factors ("personal relations" and "environment") from our FA were similar to the WHO's. In CFA, the four GOF criteria were met by our 5-domain model and WHO's 4-domain model on the psychiatric data. In PA, these two models met the GOF criteria on the general population data. The direct predictors of OQOL were our factors: "life satisfaction" and "sense of enjoyment". For the general facet, predictors were WHO domains: "environment", "physical health" and "independence'.ConclusionThe findings support the credentials of WHO's 4-domain model as a universal QOL construct; and the impression that analysis of WHOQOL-Bref could benefit from including all the items in FA and using OQOL as a dependent variable. The clinical significance is that by more of such studies, a combination of domains from the WHO models and the local models would be generated and used to develop rigorous definitions of QOL, from which primary targets for subjective QOL interventions could be delineated that would have cross-cultural relevance.

Highlights

  • The widespread international use of the 26-item WHO Quality of Life Instrument (WHOQOL-Bref) necessitates the assessment of its factor structure across cultures

  • The findings support the credentials of WHO's 4-domain model as a universal quality of life (QOL) construct; and the impression that analysis of WHOQOL-Bref could benefit from including all the items in factor analysis (FA) and using OQOL as a dependent variable

  • It is noteworthy that parsimony of the factors was observed, as each item of the questionnaire loaded on only one factor, with a minimum item loading of 0.45

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The widespread international use of the 26-item WHO Quality of Life Instrument (WHOQOL-Bref) necessitates the assessment of its factor structure across cultures. A 26-item version, the WHOQOL-Bref, was derived from there [2] This instrument deals with subjective QOL as distinct from objective QOL [3]. The instrument was developed in a wide range of languages in different cultural settings and yields comparable scores across cultures [2]. It is made up of domains (or dimensions) and facets (or sub domains). The initial model was fashioned in line with the WHOQOL – 100[1] to have six domains, namely, physical health, psychological health, level of independence, social relationships, environment, and spiritual. To derive the second (4 – domain) model, the domain of level of independence was merged with that of physical health, while the "spiritual" was merged with the psychological

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.