Quality of Life Measurement After Stroke: Uses and Abuses of the SF-36

Background and Purpose— The Medical Outcomes Study 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) is widely used to measure health status after stroke. However, a fundamental assumption for its valid use after stroke has not been comprehensively tested: is it legitimate to generate scores for 8 scales and 2 summary measures using the standard algorithms? We tested this assumption. Methods— SF-36 data from 177 people after stroke were examined (71% male; mean age, 62). We tested 6 scaling criteria to determine the legitimacy of generating the 8 SF-36 scale scores using Likert’s method of summed ratings, and we tested 2 scaling criteria to determine the appropriateness of the standard SF-36 algorithms for weighting and combining scale scores to generate 2 summary measures (physical and mental). Results— Scaling assumptions were fully satisfied for 6 of the 8 scales, but 3 of these 6 scales had notable floor and/or ceiling effects. Assumptions for generating 2 SF-36 summary measures were not satisfied. Conclusions— In this sample, 5 of the 8 SF-36 scales had limited validity as outcome measures after stroke, and the reporting of physical and mental summary scores was not supported. Results raise questions about the use of the SF-36 in stroke, and the SF-12 that is developed from it, and highlight the importance of testing scaling assumptions when applying existing scales to new populations.

[1]  L. Cronbach.  Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests , 1951 .

[2]  L. Guttman.  Some necessary conditions for common-factor analysis , 1954 .

[3]  R. Cattell.  The Scree Test For The Number Of Factors. , 1966, Multivariate behavioral research.

[4]  M. R. Novick,et al.  Statistical Theories of Mental Test Scores. , 1971 .

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

[6]  D. Streiner,et al.  Health Measurement Scales: A practical guide to thier development and use , 1989 .

[7]  Paul E. Spector.  Summated rating scale construction , 1991 .

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

[9]  J. E. Brazier,et al.  Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. , 1992, BMJ.

[10]  A. Stewart,et al.  Measuring Functioning and Well-Being: The Medical Outcomes Study Approach , 1992 .

[11]  John E. Ware,et al.  SF-36 physical and mental health summary scales : a user's manual , 1994 .

[12]  C. Sherbourne,et al.  The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. , 1994 .

[13]  R. Fitzpatrick,et al.  Self-reported functioning and well-being in patients with Parkinson's disease: comparison of the short-form health survey (SF-36) and the Parkinson's Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) , 1995, Age and ageing.

[14]  W H Rogers,et al.  Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF-36 health profile and summary measures: summary of results from the Medical Outcomes Study. , 1995, Medical care.

[15]  J. Hobart,et al.  Health-Related Quality of Life in People with Multiple Sclerosis Undergoing Inpatient Rehabilitation , 1996 .

[16]  G. Karabatsos,et al.  Validation of the Functional Assessment of Multiple Sclerosis quality of life instrument , 1996, Neurology.

[17]  J. Ware,et al.  A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. , 1996, Medical care.

[18]  C. Anderson,et al.  Validation of the Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey questionnaire among stroke patients. , 1996, Stroke.

[19]  J. Shea,et al.  SF-20 score and item distributions in a human immunodeficiency virus-seropositive sample. , 1996, Medical care.

[20]  K N Lohr,et al.  Evaluating quality-of-life and health status instruments: development of scientific review criteria. , 1996, Clinical therapeutics.

[21]  P. Dorman,et al.  A randomised comparison of the EuroQol and Short Form-36 after stroke , 1997, BMJ.

[22]  B. Gandek,et al.  MAP-R for windows: multitrait / multi-item analysis program - revised user's guide. , 1997 .

[23]  P. Dorman,et al.  Doctors and patients don't agree: cross sectional study of patients' and doctors' perceptions and assessments of disability in multiple sclerosis , 1997, BMJ.

[24]  L. Goldstein,et al.  Retrospective assessment of initial stroke severity with the Canadian Neurological Scale. , 1997, Stroke.

[25]  R. Hays,et al.  Comparison of a generic to disease-targeted health-related quality-of-life measures for multiple sclerosis. , 1997, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[26]  Crispin Jenkinson,et al.  Development and Testing of the UK SF-12 , 1997 .

[27]  H Rodgers,et al.  Is the SF-36 suitable for assessing health status of older stroke patients? , 1998, Age and ageing.

[28]  Burden of illness of multiple sclerosis: Part II: Quality of life. The Canadian Burden of Illness Study Group. , 1998, The Canadian journal of neurological sciences. Le journal canadien des sciences neurologiques.

[29]  M. Lainez,et al.  Quality of Life in Migraine and Chronic Daily Headache Patients , 1998, Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache.

[30]  D. Revicki,et al.  SF-36 summary scores: are physical and mental health truly distinct? , 1998, Medical care.

[31]  J. Ware,et al.  The SF-36 Health Survey as a generic outcome measure in clinical trials of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: tests of data quality, scaling assumptions and score reliability. , 1999, Medical care.

[32]  P Sandercock,et al.  How do scores on the EuroQol relate to scores on the SF-36 after stroke? , 1999, Stroke.

[33]  P. Scheltens.  Early diagnosis of dementia: neuroimaging , 1999, Journal of Neurology.

[34]  D. Clark,et al.  Development of a stroke-specific quality of life scale. , 1999, Stroke.

[35]  P. Nieminen,et al.  Domains and determinants of quality of life after stroke caused by brain infarction. , 2000, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[36]  M. Swash,et al.  The ALS Health Profile Study: quality of life of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis patients and carers in Europe , 2000, Journal of Neurology.

[37]  P. Jhingran,et al.  Validity and Reliability of the Migraine‐Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ Version 2.1) , 2000, Headache.

[38]  T Riise,et al.  Performance of the SF-36, SF-12, and RAND-36 Summary Scales in a Multiple Sclerosis Population , 2000, Medical care.

[39]  M. Myslinski.  Comparison of a Generic to Disease-Targeted Health-Related Quality-of-Life Measures for Multiple Sclerosis. , 2000 .

[40]  A. Thompson,et al.  The SF-36 in multiple sclerosis: why basic assumptions must be tested , 2001, Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry.

[41]  M. Swash,et al.  Use of the short form health survey (SF-36) in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: tests of data quality, score reliability, response rate and scaling assumptions , 2002, Journal of Neurology.

[42]  J. Ware.  SF-36 health survey: Manual and interpretation guide , 2003 .

[43]  G. Baker,et al.  The SF-36 as a health status measure for epilepsy: A psychometric assessment , 1999, Quality of Life Research.