Ware JE Jr, Keller SD, Hatoum HT, Kong SX. The SF-36 Arthritis-Specific Health Index (ASHI): I. Development and cross-validation of scoring algorithms. Med Care 1999; 37:MS40-50
An arthritis-specific health index (ASHI) for the SF-36 Health Survey was developed by studying its responsiveness to changes in clinical indicators of arthritis severity. Longitudinal data from 1,076 patients participating in four placebo-controlled trials were analyzed. All had at least a 6-month history of moderate to severe osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis of the knee or hip. All had undergone a washout period of 3 to 14 days before baseline assessment to bring about a flare state in osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis symptoms. Their average age was 60 years and 72% were female. Change scores for the eight-scale SF-36 health profile (acute version) and five arthritis-specific measures of disease severity (knee pain on weight bearing, time to walk 50 feet, physician global evaluation of symptom severity and impact, patient global evaluation of symptom severity and impact, and pain intensity visual analogue scale) were computed by subtracting scores before treatment from scores at two-week follow-up. Canonical correlation methods were used to derive weights for changes in SF-36 scales to score a single index (ASHI) that maximized its correlation with changes in the set of five clinical measures of arthritis severity. The weights used to score the ASHI were cross-validated in a 25% holdout group (N = 144) from the first two osteoarthritis trials and in two additional osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis trials (N = 530). Only one SF-36 canonical variate (ASHI) correlated significantly (F = 4.69, P < 0.0001) with the clinical canonical variate that served as the "criterion" measure of change in the severity of arthritis. Changes in the ASHI and clinical canonical variate were substantially correlated in the developmental sample (r = 0.628, P < 0.0001) and on cross-validation (r = 0.629, P < 0.0001). The clinical canonical variate correlated highly (r = 0.75-0.88) with changes in all but one of the five clinical measures (50-foot walk; r = 0.41). The pattern of correlations between changes in SF-36 scales and the ASHI indicated that ASHI is primarily a measure of bodily pain (r = 0.92) and other aspects of physical and role functioning and well-being (r = 0.69 for Role-Physical, r = 0.68 for Physical Functioning, r = 0.52 for Social Functioning, and r = 0.51 Vitality). The patterns of correlations between SF-36 scales and the ASHI were very similar across developmental and cross-validation samples. This research demonstrates the feasibility and generalizability of a single ASHI scored from changes in responses to the SF-36 Health Survey. The generic SF-36 health profile, which has already been shown to be useful in comparing arthritis with other diseases and treatments, can also be scored specifically to make it more useful in studies of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis.
Keller SD, Ware JE Jr, Hatoum HT, Kong SX. The SF-36 Arthritis-Specific Health Index (ASHI): II. Tests of validity in four clinical trials. Med Care 1999; 37:MS51-60
OBJECTIVE: The SF-36 Arthritis-Specific Health Index (ASHI) was constructed to improve the responsiveness of the SF-36 Health Survey to changes in the severity of arthritis through the use of arthritis-specific scoring algorithms. This study compared the responsiveness of the ASHI and other generic scales and summary measures scored from the SF-36 in clinical trials of health outcomes for patients with arthritis.
METHODS: Longitudinal data for patients (n = 835) participating in four placebo-controlled trials were analyzed. Study participants had at least a 6-month history of moderate to severe osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis of the knee or hip. All had undergone a washout period of 3 to 14 days before baseline assessment to bring about a flare state in osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis symptoms. Their average age was 60 years, and 72% were female. Responders and nonresponders were classified on the basis of physician assessments of changes in arthritis severity, with blinding as to treatment group; treated and untreated (placebo) groups were also compared. For the SF-36 ASHI, generic physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary measures and each of eight subscales scored from the SF-36 (acute version) change scores were computed by subtracting scores before treatment from scores at 2-week follow-up. To evaluate empirical validity, analyses of variance were performed. For each measure, an F-ratio was computed for the comparison between clinically defined groups of responders and nonresponders and between groups of patients assigned to placebo versus drug therapy. Relative validity (RV) coefficients were computed for the ASHI in comparison with PCS, MCS, and the best SF-36 scale to determine which was more responsive.
RESULTS: In analyses of each of the four trials and all trials combined, RV coefficients for the ASHI were higher than those for both of the generic SF-36 summary measures and for the most valid SF-36 scale (Bodily Pain), with only one exception. Across 40 tests of validity in distinguishing treated from untreated patients, the ASHI was 5% to 19% more valid than the best SF-36 scale (RV = 1.05-1.19; RV = 1.10 in all trials combined). The generic summary measures (PCS and MCS) were much less valid in these tests (RV = 0.67 and 0.27, respectively). In analyses of responders and nonresponders, RV coefficients for the ASHI ranged from 0.70 to 1.22 (RV = 1.04 in all trials combined), in comparison with the best SF-36 subscale, which was always Bodily Pain. RV coefficients were lower for PCS (RV = 0.75) and much lower than the MCS (RV = 0.18) in comparisons of treatment outcomes based on all trials combined.
CONCLUSION: The ASHI appears to be more valid than the eight SF-36 scales and PCS and MCS summary measures for purposes of distinguishing between treated and untreated patients and between clinical responders and nonresponders. This study demonstrates the feasibility of improving the validity of the SF-36 through the use of arthritis-specific scoring while retaining the option of generic scoring, which makes it possible to also compare results across diseases and treatments.
Pfennings LE, Van der Ploeg HM, Cohen L, Bramsen I, Polman CH, Lankhorst GJ, Vleugels L. A health-related quality of life questionnaire for multiple sclerosis patients. Acta Neurol Scand 1999; 100:148-55
OBJECTIVE: The construction of a brief, valid and reliable HRQoL questionnaire for use in multiple sclerosis patients based on generic and disease-specific HRQoL measures.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), COOP/ WONCA Charts, and Disability & Impact Profile (DIP) were used in a longitudinal study in 162 patients with multiple sclerosis.
RESULTS: Factor analyses identified 2 underlying dimensions of HRQoL, relating to "physical functioning" and "psychological functioning". Selection of the 3 highest loading reliable scales on each factor resulted in a final questionnaire consisting of 3 scales of the SF-36 and 3 scales of the DIP. In total 40 items were selected; completion time is about 10 min.
CONCLUSION: The final questionnaire adequately measured 2 dimensions of HRQoL. The length of the questionnaire is acceptable for patients with MS in view of respondent burden.
Cohen L, Pouwer F, Pfennings LE, Lankhorst GJ, van der Ploeg HM, Polman CH, Ader HJ, Jonnson A, Vleugels L. Factor structure of the Disability and Impact Profile in patients with multiple sclerosis. Qual Life Res 1999; 8:141-50
The Disability and Impact Profile (DIP) is used for the measurement of quality of life in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients. Data from 211 persons with definite MS from Belgium, Denmark and the Netherlands were used to address three questions. To what extent do the impairment ratings and their complementary weighted scores share common variance? What is the factor structure of the weighted scores? To what extent do disease-related information and information from psychological questionnaires offer concurrent validity for the factors? Correlations between impairment ratings and the weighted item scores were high; for most items the complementary ratings of impact do not supplement information provided by impairment ratings. The DIP weighted scores can be represented to some extent by three independent dimensions: a motor (skeletal movement) or displacement ability factor, a factor relating to sensory-cognitive intactness and a psychological well-being factor. A two-factor solution provides a first factor identical to that of the three-factor solution and a second factor representing psychological well-being. The two factors correlate well with instruments measuring disability and with satisfaction versus emotional distress. Provisional scales based on the factors were constructed.
Lankhorst GJ, Jelles F, Smits RC, Polman CH, Kuik DJ, Pfennings LE, Cohen L, van der Ploeg HM, Ketelaer P, Vleugels L. Quality of life in multiple sclerosis: the disability and impact profile (DIP). J Neurol 1996; 243:469-74
Seventy-three Dutch and Flemish patients with definite multiple sclerosis (MS) were assessed by means of the Disability and Impact Profile (DIP), which is a 2 x 39 item, self-administered questionnaire with parallel questions about disabilities and their importance for or impact on the patient, resulting in a profile of weighted scores. It was designed as a tool for clinical assessment of quality of life (QoL) domains in MS patients. Group data showed more than 50% loss on weighted scores for "walk", "clean home", "work" and "worry about deterioration". In individual patients a median of 7 (range 0-23) major disruptions of quality of life (MD-QoL: loss on weighted score more than 50%) was found. Prevalence of MD-QoL in more than 10% of the patients was found for as many as 31 disabilities and > 50% for 3 ("clean home", "work" and "worry about deterioration"). Results in the MS group were compared with available data from 25 patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and 25 patients with a spinal cord lesion (SCl). Weighted scores of "read", "memory" and "concentration" were significantly lower in the MS group than in the RA and SCl groups. Significantly lower weighted scores in both the MS and RA groups were found for "worry about deterioration", "physical endurance", "clean home", "work", "see" and "write". In conclusion, major disruptions in many domains of QoL were found in MS patients. Weighted score profiles for MS were in accordance with clinical manifestations. Unlike Kurtzke's Extended Disability Status Scale, DIP assesses a wide range of potentially MS-affected human activities, and also takes into account the subjective perception of disabilities.
Last update: November 2006
