Literature DB >> 7711691

Sensitivity to change of health status measures in a randomized controlled trial: comparison of the COOP charts and the SF-36.

C Jenkinson1, K Lawrence, D McWhinnie, J Gordon.   

Abstract

This study compared the sensitivity to change of comparable dimensions of a multi-item multi-dimensional health status measure (the SF-36) with the equivalent single item domains on the Dartmouth COOP charts. One hundred and twenty nine patients were randomized to either day case laparoscopic surgery (n = 60) or open inguinal hernia repair (n = 69). Respondents completed the SF-36 and COOP charts at baseline (prior to surgery) and at follow up at 10 days and 6 weeks. Equivalent dimensions of physical functioning, mental health/emotional condition, social activities, pain and overall condition/general health on the two questionnaires were compared. Despite slightly different pictures of change provided by the physical functioning and 'overall condition/general health' dimensions the general picture of change provided by the two instruments was similar. At 10 days, patients who underwent open surgery reported far greater levels of dysfunction than those who underwent laparoscopic surgery on both questionnaires. At 6 weeks the pain dimension of both questionnaires indicated a large improvement from baseline, whilst no other domain on either questionnaire for either group indicated such improvement. The general picture of change provided by the two measures was similar. The results suggest that both the SF-36 and the COOP charts may prove suitable for the assessment of health perception outcomes in surgical clinical trials. Differences on certain domains were caused in large measure by the nature of the questions posed. The study once again highlights the importance of checking item content to determine the suitability of any particular measure for a given study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7711691     DOI: 10.1007/bf00434383

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  24 in total

1.  Quality of life bibliography and indexes.

Authors:  B Spilker; F R Molinek; K A Johnston; R L Simpson; H H Tilson
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1990-12       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.

Authors:  J E Ware; C D Sherbourne
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  The validity and relative precision of MOS short- and long-form health status scales and Dartmouth COOP charts. Results from the Medical Outcomes Study.

Authors:  C A McHorney; J E Ware; W Rogers; A E Raczek; J F Lu
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  Change in self-reported functioning in older persons entering a residential care facility.

Authors:  A L Siu; J G Ouslander; D Osterweil; D B Reuben; R D Hays
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Sensitivity of quality of life domains and constructs to longitudinal change in a clinical trial comparing salmeterol with placebo in asthmatics.

Authors:  M E Hyland; C A Kenyon; P A Jacobs
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Assessment of the quality of life of patients with advanced cancer.

Authors:  I R Gough; C M Furnival; L Schilder; W Grove
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol       Date:  1983-08

7.  The effects of antihypertensive therapy on the quality of life.

Authors:  S H Croog; S Levine; M A Testa; B Brown; C J Bulpitt; C D Jenkins; G L Klerman; G H Williams
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1986-06-26       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Measuring change over time: a comparison of results from a global single item of health status and the multi-dimensional SF-36 health status survey questionnaire in patients presenting with menorrhagia.

Authors:  C Jenkinson; V Peto; A Coulter
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status.

Authors:  L E Kazis; J J Anderson; R F Meenan
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  Analysis of quality of life data from a randomized, placebo-controlled heart-failure trial.

Authors:  P K Tandon; H Stander; R P Schwarz
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 6.437

View more
  12 in total

1.  A comparison of responsiveness indices in multiple sclerosis patients.

Authors:  L E Pfennings; H M van der Ploeg; L Cohen; C H Polman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.147

2.  Use of the Short Form-36 to detect the influence of upper gastrointestinal disease on self-reported health status.

Authors:  J W Mant; C Jenkinson; M F Murphy; K Clipsham; P Marshall; M P Vessey
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Health-related quality of life: an indicator of quality of care?

Authors:  H F Treurniet; M L Essink-Bot; J P Mackenbach; P J van der Maas
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Should breast reduction surgery be rationed? A comparison of the health status of patients before and after treatment: postal questionnaire survey.

Authors:  A Klassen; R Fitzpatrick; C Jenkinson; T Goodacre
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-08-24

5.  Health-related quality of life in patients with chronic hepatitis C and advanced fibrosis.

Authors:  Herbert L Bonkovsky; Kristin K Snow; Peter F Malet; Carla Back-Madruga; Robert J Fontana; Richard K Sterling; Clark C Kulig; Adrian M Di Bisceglie; Timothy R Morgan; Jules L Dienstag; Marc G Ghany; David R Gretch
Journal:  J Hepatol       Date:  2006-11-27       Impact factor: 25.083

6.  Health-related quality-of-life changes after laparoscopic and open incisional hernia repair: a matched pair analysis.

Authors:  T Mussack; R Ladurner; T Vogel; A Lienemann; A Eder-Willwohl; K K Hallfeldt
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-01-19       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Functional outcome and quality of life after angiography and operation for unruptured intracranial aneurysms. On behalf of the MARS Study Group.

Authors:  T W Raaymakers
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 10.154

8.  Randomised controlled trial comparing hospital at home care with inpatient hospital care. I: three month follow up of health outcomes.

Authors:  S Shepperd; D Harwood; C Jenkinson; A Gray; M Vessey; P Morgan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-06-13

9.  Comparison of the sensitivity to change of long and short form pain measures.

Authors:  C Jenkinson; D Carroll; M Egerton; T Frankland; H McQuay; C Nagle
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  Statistical significant change versus relevant or important change in (quasi) experimental design: some conceptual and methodological problems in estimating magnitude of intervention-related change in health services research.

Authors:  Berrie Middel; Eric van Sonderen
Journal:  Int J Integr Care       Date:  2002-12-17       Impact factor: 5.120

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.