A comparison of different indices of responsiveness.

The first purpose of this study was to determine if different indices of responsiveness provided similar rank orderings of scales in terms of responsiveness. The second purpose was to compare the responsiveness of patient-specific, disease-specific, and generic health status measures for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. All patients of one surgeon at a single institution were eligible for the study. Patients who did not speak English or did not return for post-operative evaluations were excluded. Patients completed two disease-specific scales (the Harris Hip Scale and the Western Ontario and McMaster osteoarthritis scale or WOMAC), one generic health status scale (the SF-36), and two patient-specific scales (the McMaster-Toronto Arthritis questionnaire or MACTAR and the Patient Specific Index or PASI). All scales were administered on two occasions: before and 6 months after total hip arthroplasty. Responsiveness was measured using: (1) the responsiveness statistic; (2) standardized response mean; (3) relative efficiency statistic; (4) effect size; and also by (5) correlating each scale's change score with the change in patients' global ratings of their "hip function." Seventy-eight sequential patients completed the study. The mean age was 62 years (range 25-87), 55% were male, and 71% had osteoarthritis. Test-retest reliability of the scales ranged from 0.31 to 0.93. The correlation among scales was consistent with a priori hypotheses confirming construct validity of the scales. Although the disease-specific scales were generally rated as the most responsive scales, the different indices provided different rank orderings by up to 5 levels (p = 0.04). In conclusion, disease-specific scales are the most responsive scales. However, choosing among scales based on responsiveness must be done with caution because different indices of responsiveness provide different rank ordering.

[1]  S Ziebland,et al.  A comparison of the sensitivity to change of several health status instruments in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1993, The Journal of rheumatology.

[2]  J. Fleiss Statistical methods for rates and proportions , 1974 .

[3]  Carol A. Trujillo,et al.  The MOS 36-Item Short Form Health Survey: reliability, validity, and preliminary findings in schizophrenic outpatients. , 1998, Medical care.

[4]  C. Mackenzie,et al.  A patient-specific measure of change in maximal function. , 1986, Archives of internal medicine.

[5]  R. Sitgreaves Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). , 1979 .

[6]  M. Guttadauria,et al.  Methotrexate in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Impact on Quality of Life Assessed by Traditional Standard-Item and Individualized Patient Preference Health Status Questionnaires , 1990 .

[7]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Should study subjects see their previous responses? , 1985, Journal of chronic diseases.

[8]  R. Deyo,et al.  Toward clinical applications of health status measures: sensitivity of scales to clinically important changes. , 1984, Health services research.

[9]  R. Deyo,et al.  Generic and Disease-Specific Measures in Assessing Health Status and Quality of Life , 1989, Medical care.

[10]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. , 1989, Controlled clinical trials.

[11]  N. Bellamy Pain assessment in osteoarthritis: experience with the WOMAC osteoarthritis index. , 1989, Seminars in arthritis and rheumatism.

[12]  P Tugwell,et al.  The MACTAR Patient Preference Disability Questionnaire--an individualized functional priority approach for assessing improvement in physical disability in clinical trials in rheumatoid arthritis. , 1987, The Journal of rheumatology.

[13]  G. Guyatt,et al.  A comparison of Likert and visual analogue scales for measuring change in function. , 1987, Journal of chronic diseases.

[14]  C. Sledge,et al.  Total hip and total knee replacement : second of two parts , 1990 .

[15]  A. Laupacis,et al.  The use of generic and specific quality-of-life measures in hemodialysis patients treated with erythropoietin. The Canadian Erythropoietin Study Group. , 1991, Controlled clinical trials.

[16]  M H Liang,et al.  Evaluating measurement responsiveness. , 1995, The Journal of rheumatology.

[17]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. , 1987, Journal of chronic diseases.

[18]  P. Tugwell,et al.  Which outcome measures should be used in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials? Clinical and quality-of-life measures' responsiveness to treatment in a randomized controlled trial. , 1995, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[19]  M. Liang,et al.  Comparative Measurement Sensitivity of Short and Longer Health Status Instruments , 1992, Medical care.

[20]  M. Liang,et al.  Relative responsiveness of condition-specific and generic health status measures in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. , 1995, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[21]  A R Feinstein,et al.  A comparative contrast of clinimetric and psychometric methods for constructing indexes and rating scales. , 1992, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[22]  W. Harris,et al.  Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. , 1969, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[23]  R A Deyo,et al.  Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. , 1986, Journal of chronic diseases.

[24]  Lewis E. Kazis,et al.  Effect Sizes for Interpreting Changes in Health Status , 1989, Medical care.

[25]  M. Liang,et al.  Comparisons of Five Health Status Instruments for Orthopedic Evaluation , 1990, Medical care.

[26]  M H Liang,et al.  Comparative measurement efficiency and sensitivity of five health status instruments for arthritis research. , 1985, Arthritis and rheumatism.

[27]  C. Mackenzie,et al.  Can the Sickness Impact Profile measure change? An example of scale assessment. , 1986, Journal of chronic diseases.

[28]  D. Churchill,et al.  A comparison of evaluative indices of quality of life and cognitive function in hemodialysis patients. , 1991, Controlled clinical trials.

[29]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) , 1992 .

[30]  C. Goldsmith,et al.  Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. , 1988, The Journal of rheumatology.

[31]  William H. Harris,et al.  Total Hip and Total Knee Replacement , 1990 .

[32]  J. Fleiss,et al.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. , 1979, Psychological bulletin.

[33]  P. Tugwell,et al.  Minimum important difference between patients with rheumatoid arthritis: the patient's perspective. , 1993, The Journal of rheumatology.

[34]  James G Wright,et al.  Comparison of a generic and a disease-specific measure of pain and physical function after knee replacement surgery. , 1995, Medical care.

[35]  A. Stewart,et al.  The MOS short-form general health survey. Reliability and validity in a patient population. , 1988, Medical care.

[36]  J. Ware,et al.  Methods for assessing condition-specific and generic functional status outcomes after total knee replacement. , 1992, Medical care.