A Longitudinal Study of Hospitalization Rates for Patients with Chronic Disease: Results from the Medical Outcomes Study.

To prospectively compare inpatient and outpatient utilization rates between prepaid (PPD) and fee-for-service (FFS) insurance coverage for patients with chronic disease. Data from the Medical Outcomes Study, a longitudinal observational study of chronic disease patients conducted in Boston, Chicago, and Los Angeles.A four-year prospective study of resource utilization among 1,681 patients under treatment for hypertension, diabetes, myocardial infarction, or congestive heart failure in the practices of 367 clinicians

Functional outcome and quality of life 5 and 12.5 years after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage

Patients who recover from aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) often remain disabled or have persisting symptoms with a reduced quality of life (QoL). We assessed functional outcome and QoL 5 and 12.5 years after SAH. In a consecutive series of 64 patients with mean age at SAH of 51 years, initial outcome assessments had been performed at 4 and 18 months after SAH. At the initial and current outcome assessments, functional outcome was measured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and QoL with the SF-36 and a visual analogue scale (VAS). We studied the change in outcome measurements over time. We used the non-parametric Wilcoxon test to compare differences in mRS grades and calculated differences with corresponding 95% confidence intervals in the domain scores of the SF-36 and the VAS. After 5 years, seven patients had died and five patients had missing data. Compared with the 4-month follow-up, the mRS had improved in 29 of the 52 patients, remained similar in 19 patients. The overall QoL (SF-36 domains and VAS score) was better. At 12.5 years an additional six patients had died. Compared to the 4-month study, 25 of the 46 remaining patients had improved mRS, 12 had remained the same and in nine patients the mRS had worsened. Between the 5 and the 12.5 years follow-up, the improvement in mRS had decreased but patients reported overall a better QoL. Among long-time survivors, QoL may improve more than a decade after SAH

Exploring differential item functioning in the SF-36 by demographic, clinical, psychological and social factors in an osteoarthritis population

The SF-36 is a very commonly used generic measure of health outcome in osteoarthritis (OA). An important, but frequently overlooked, aspect of validating health outcome measures is to establish if items work in the same way across subgroup of a population. That is, if respondents have the same 'true' level of outcome, does the item give the same score in different subgroups or is it biased towards one subgroup or another. Differential item functioning (DIF) can identify items that may be biased for one group or another and has been applied to measuring patient reported outcomes. Items may show DIF for different conditions and between cultures, however the SF-36 has not been specifically examined in an osteoarthritis population nor in a UK population. Hence, the aim of the study was to apply the DIF method to the SF-36 for a UK OA population. The sample comprised a community sample of 763 people with OA who participated in the Somerset and Avon Survey of Health. The SF-36 was explored for DIF with respect to demographic, social, clinical and psychological factors. Well developed ordinal regression models were used to identify DIF items. Results: DIF items were found by age (6 items), employment status (6 items), social class (2 items), mood (2 items), hip v knee (2 items), social deprivation (1 item) and body mass index (1 item). Although the impact of the DIF items rarely had a significant effect on the conclusions of group comparisons, in most cases there was a significant change in effect size. Overall, the SF-36 performed well with only a small number of DIF items identified, a reassuring finding in view of the frequent use of the SF-36 in OA. Nevertheless, where DIF items were identified it would be advisable to analyse data taking account of DIF items, especially when age effects are the focus of interest

Indirect calibration between clinical observers - application to the New York Heart Association functional classification system

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Previous studies showed an inter-observer agreement for the NYHA classification of approximately 55%. The aim of this study was to calibrate the New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification system between observers, increasing its reliability.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Among 1136 community-dwellers in Porto, Portugal, aged ≥ 45 years, 265 reporting breathlessness answered a 4-item questionnaire to characterize symptom severity. The questionnaire was administered by 7 physicians who also classified the subject's functional capacity according to NYHA. Each subject was assessed by one physician. We calibrated NYHA classifications by the concurrent method, using 1-parameter logistic graded response model. Discrepancies between observers were assessed by differences in ability thresholds between NYHA classes I-II and II-III. The ability estimated by the model was used to predict the NYHA classification for each observer.</p> <p>Estimates of the first and second thresholds for each observer ranged from -1.92 to 0.46 and from 1.42 to 2.30, respectively. The agreement between estimated ability and the observers' NYHA classification was 88% (kappa = 0.61).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The study objectively indicates the main reason why several studies have reported low inter-observer is the existence of discrepant thresholds between observers in the definition of NYHA classes. The concurrent method can be used to minimize the reliability problem of NYHA classification.</p

Quality of Life in Oncological Patients with Oropharyngeal Dysphagia: Validity and Reliability of the Dutch Version of the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory and the Deglutition Handicap Index

Quality of life is an important outcome measurement in objectifying the current health status or therapy effects in patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia. In this study, the validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the Deglutition Handicap Index (DHI) and the MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory (MDADI) have been determined for oncological patients with oropharyngeal dysphagia. At Maastricht University Medical Center, 76 consecutive patients were selected and asked to fill in three questionnaires on quality of life related to oropharyngeal dysphagia (the SWAL-QOL, the MDADI, and the DHI) as well as a simple one-item visual analog Dysphagia Severity Scale. None of the quality-of-life questionnaires showed any floor or ceiling effect. The test-retest reliability of the MDADI and the Dysphagia Severity Scale proved to be good. The test-retest reliability of the DHI could not be determined because of insufficient data, but the intraclass correlation coefficients were rather high. The internal consistency proved to be good. However, confirmatory factor analysis could not distinguish the underlying constructs as defined by the subscales per questionnaire. When assessing criterion validity, both the MDADI and the DHI showed satisfactory associations with the SWAL-QOL (reference or gold standard) after having removed the less relevant subscales of the SWAL-QOL. In conclusion, when assessing the validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the DHI or the MDADI, not all psychometric properties have been adequately met. In general, because of difficulties in the interpretation of study results when using questionnaires lacking sufficient psychometric quality, it is recommended that researchers strive to use questionnaires with the most optimal psychometric properties

“It’s hard to tell”. The challenges of scoring patients on standardised outcome measures by multidisciplinary teams: a case study of Neurorehabilitation

Background Interest is increasing in the application of standardised outcome measures in clinical practice. Measures designed for use in research may not be sufficiently precise to be used in monitoring individual patients. However, little is known about how clinicians and in particular, multidisciplinary teams, score patients using these measures. This paper explores the challenges faced by multidisciplinary teams in allocating scores on standardised outcome measures in clinical practice. Methods Qualitative case study of an inpatient neurorehabilitation team who routinely collected standardised outcome measures on their patients. Data were collected using non participant observation, fieldnotes and tape recordings of 16 multidisciplinary team meetings during which the measures were recited and scored. Eleven clinicians from a range of different professions were also interviewed. Data were analysed used grounded theory techniques. Results We identified a number of instances where scoring the patient was 'problematic'. In 'problematic' scoring, the scores were uncertain and subject to revision and adjustment. They sometimes required negotiation to agree on a shared understanding of concepts to be measured and the guidelines for scoring. Several factors gave rise to this problematic scoring. Team members' knowledge about patients' problems changed over time so that initial scores had to be revised or dismissed, creating an impression of deterioration when none had occurred. Patients had complex problems which could not easily be distinguished from each other and patients themselves varied in their ability to perform tasks over time and across different settings. Team members from different professions worked with patients in different ways and had different perspectives on patients' problems. This was particularly an issue in the scoring of concepts such as anxiety, depression, orientation, social integration and cognitive problems. Conclusion From a psychometric perspective these problems would raise questions about the validity, reliability and responsiveness of the scores. However, from a clinical perspective, such characteristics are an inherent part of clinical judgement and reasoning. It is important to highlight the challenges faced by multidisciplinary teams in scoring patients on standardised outcome measures but it would be unwarranted to conclude that such challenges imply that these measures should not be used in clinical practice for decision making about individual patients. However, our findings do raise some concerns about the use of such measures for performance management

Measuring health-related quality of life in adolescents and young adults: Swedish normative data for the SF-36 and the HADS, and the influence of age, gender, and method of administration

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of research about health-related quality of life (HRQL) among adolescents, as studies have to a large extent focused on adults. The main aim was to provide information for future studies in this growing field by presenting normative data for the Short Form 36 (SF-36) and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) for Swedish adolescents and young adults. Additionally, the influence of age and gender, as well as method of administration, was investigated. METHODS: A sample of 585 persons aged 13–23 was randomly chosen from the general population, and stratified regarding age group (young adolescents: 13–15 years; older adolescents: 16–19 years, and young adults: 20–23 years) and gender (an equal amount of males and females). Within each stratum, the participants were randomized according to two modes of administration, telephone interview and postal questionnaire, and asked to complete the SF-36 and the HADS. Descriptive statistics are presented by survey mode, gender, and age group. A gender comparison was made by independent t-test; and one-way ANOVA was conducted to evaluate age differences. RESULTS: Effects of age and gender were found: males reported better health-related quality of life than females, and the young adolescents (13–15 years old) reported better HRQL than the two older age groups. The older participants (16–23 years old) reported higher scores when interviewed over the telephone than when they answered a postal questionnaire, a difference which was more marked among females. Interestingly, the 13–15-year-olds did not react to the mode of administration to the same extent. CONCLUSION: The importance of taking age, gender, and method of administration into consideration, both when planning studies and when comparing results from different groups, studies, or over time, is stressed

Correlated physical and mental health summary scores for the SF-36 and SF-12 Health Survey, V.1

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The SF-36 and SF-12 summary scores were derived using an uncorrelated (orthogonal) factor solution. We estimate SF-36 and SF-12 summary scores using a correlated (oblique) physical and mental health factor model.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We administered the SF-36 to 7,093 patients who received medical care from an independent association of 48 physician groups in the western United States. Correlated physical health (PCS_c) and mental health (MCS_c) scores were constructed by multiplying each SF-36 scale z-score by its respective scoring coefficient from the obliquely rotated two factor solution. PCS_c-12 and MCS_c-12 scores were estimated using an approach similar to the one used to derive the original SF-12 summary scores.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The estimated correlation between SF-36 PCS_cand MCS_cscores was 0.62. There were far fewer negative factor scoring coefficients for the oblique factor solution compared to the factor scoring coefficients produced by the standard orthogonal factor solution. Similar results were found for PCS_c-12, and MCS_c-12 summary scores.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Correlated physical and mental health summary scores for the SF-36 and SF-12 derived from an obliquely rotated factor solution should be used along with the uncorrelated summary scores. The new scoring algorithm can reduce inconsistent results between the SF-36 scale scores and physical and mental health summary scores reported in some prior studies.</p> <p>(Subscripts C = correlated and UC = uncorrelated)</p

The use of the SF-36 questionnaire in adult survivors of childhood cancer: evaluation of data quality, score reliability, and scaling assumptions

BACKGROUND: The SF-36 has been used in a number of previous studies that have investigated the health status of childhood cancer survivors, but it never has been evaluated regarding data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability in this population. As health status among childhood cancer survivors is being increasingly investigated, it is important that the measurement instruments are reliable, validated and appropriate for use in this population. The aim of this paper was to determine whether the SF-36 questionnaire is a valid and reliable instrument in assessing self-perceived health status of adult survivors of childhood cancer. METHODS: We examined the SF-36 to see how it performed with respect to (1) data completeness, (2) distribution of the scale scores, (3) item-internal consistency, (4) item-discriminant validity, (5) internal consistency, and (6) scaling assumptions. For this investigation we used SF-36 data from a population-based study of 10,189 adult survivors of childhood cancer. RESULTS: Overall, missing values ranged per item from 0.5 to 2.9 percent. Ceiling effects were found to be highest in the role limitation-physical (76.7%) and role limitation-emotional (76.5%) scales. All correlations between items and their hypothesised scales exceeded the suggested standard of 0.40 for satisfactory item-consistency. Across all scales, the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of reliability was found to be higher than the suggested value of 0.70. Consistent across all cancer groups, the physical health related scale scores correlated strongly with the Physical Component Summary (PCS) scale scores and weakly with the Mental Component Summary (MCS) scale scores. Also, the mental health and role limitation-emotional scales correlated strongly with the MCS scale score and weakly with the PCS scale score. Moderate to strong correlations with both summary scores were found for the general health perception, energy/vitality, and social functioning scales. CONCLUSION: The findings presented in this paper provide support for the validity and reliability of the SF-36 when used in long-term survivors of childhood cancer. These findings should encourage other researchers and health care practitioners to use the SF-36 when assessing health status in this population, although it should be recognised that ceiling effects can occur