Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

The SF-36: a simple, effective measure of mobility disability for epidemiological studies

By H.E. Syddall, H.J. Martin, R.H. Harwood and C. Cooper


Background<br/><br/>Mobility disability is a major problem in older people. Numerous scales exist for the measurement of disability but often these do not permit comparisons between study groups. The physical functioning (PF) domain of the established and widely used Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire asks about limitations on ten mobility activities.<br/><br/>Objectives<br/><br/>To describe prevalence of mobility disability in an elderly population, investigate the validity of the SF-36 PF score as a measure of mobility disability, and to establish age and sex specific norms for the PF score.<br/><br/>Methods<br/><br/>We explored relationships between the SF-36 PF score and objectively measured physical performance variables among 349 men and 280 women, 59-72 years of age, who participated in the Hertfordshire Cohort Study (HCS). Normative data were derived from the Health Survey for England (HSE) 1996.<br/><br/>Results<br/><br/>32% of men and 46% of women had at least some limitation in PF scale items. Poor SF-36 PF scores (lowest fifth of the gender-specific distribution) were related to: lower grip strength; longer timed-up-and-go, 3m walk, and chair rises test times in men and women; and lower quadriceps peak torque in women but not men. HSE normative data showed that median PF scores declined with increasing age in men and women.<br/><br/>Conclusion<br/><br/>Our results are consistent with the SF-36 PF score being a valid measure of mobility disability in epidemiological studies. This approach might be a first step towards enabling simple comparisons of prevalence of mobility disability between different studies of older people. The SF-36 PF score could usefully complement existing detailed schemes for classification of disability and it now requires validation against them

Topics: RA0421
Year: 2009
OAI identifier:
Provided by: e-Prints Soton

Suggested articles


  1. (1998). Locomotor disability in a cohort of British men: the impact of lifestyle and disease. doi
  2. (1982). Clinical and public health perspectives and applications of health-related quality of life measurement. Soc Sci.Med 1995;41:1383–94. [PubMed: 8560306] 5. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index.
  3. Current and future worldwide prevalence of dependency, its relationship to total population, and dependency ratios.
  4. (1998). Overview of the SF-36 Health Survey and the International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) Project. doi
  5. (2009). Designing randomized, controlled trials aimed at preventing or delaying functional decline and disability in frail, older persons: a consensus report. J Am Geriatr.Soc 2004;52:625–34. [PubMed: 15066083] 12. Brazier doi
  6. (2005). Lower body functioning as a predictor of subsequent disability among older Mexican Americans. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1998;53:M491–M495. [PubMed: 9823755] 16. Syddall
  7. Birth weight, weight at one year and body composition in older men: findings from the Hertfordshire Cohort Study.
  8. Levels of customary physical activity among the old and the very old living at home. doi
  9. Reliability and validity of grip and pinch strength evaluations. doi
  10. (1991). The timed “up & go”: A test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons.
  11. Shared risk factors for falls, incontinence, and functional dependence. Unifying the approach to geriatric syndromes. JAMA 1995;273:1348–53. [PubMed: 7715059] 25. Bassey doi
  12. (2001). [computer file]distributorSN: 3886 29. Bobak
  13. (2009). Nutr Health Aging. Author manuscript; available in PMC

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.