Literature DB >> 8901371

NHP or SIP--a comparative study in renal insufficiency associated anemia.

M L Essink-Bot1, P F Krabbe, H M van Agt, G J Bonsel.   

Abstract

In this study we compared the feasibility, internal structure and psychometric characteristics (internal consistency, test-retest reliability, construct validity) of two widely used generic health status measures, i.e. the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP) and the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) when employed among a sample of patients on renal dialysis (n = 63). The NHP was found to be more feasible, i.e. shorter and less difficult, than the SIP. The NHP scales showed somewhat higher levels of internal consistency (mean alpha = 0.67, range = 0.39-0.80) than the SIP scales (mean alpha = 0.65, range = 0.14-0.82). Test-retest reliability with a 24-hour interval was acceptable for most NHP scales (not available for the SIP in this study). Intercorrelations between the NHP scales were somewhat weaker than those for the SIP, and the expected patterns of scale intercorrelations were largely confirmed. The overall pattern of correlations between NHP scales and SIP scales was consistent with expectations, although the correlations were generally rather weak. Correlations between NHP scales and SIP scales and instruments measuring mainly physical functioning (ADL, Karnofsky) were largely as expected. Similarly, correlations between NHP scales and SIP scales and instruments measuring mainly psychological functioning [STAI (anxiety), SDS-Zung (depression)] were also as expected, although here the correlations were weaker for the SIP when compared with the NHP. The Index of Well-being exhibited intra-class correlations > 0.3 with one SIP scale and with five out of six NHP scales. Common factor analysis, yielding a two-factor solution with a physical and a mental factor of equal importance, showed the SIP scales to load more on the physical factor, while the NHP scales loaded more on the mental factor. The NHP generally performed better than the SIP in terms of feasibility and internal consistency. Physical functioning is emphasized in the SIP, whereas the emphasis of the NHP lies on mental functioning. The analysis confirmed to some extent the intentions of the constructors of NHP and SIP respectively, i.e. the NHP to be a measure of perceived health and the SIP to be a more functional measure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8901371     DOI: 10.1007/bf00435973

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


  11 in total

1.  A SELF-RATING DEPRESSION SCALE.

Authors:  W W ZUNG
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1965-01

2.  [The sickness impact profile; results of an evaluation study of the Dutch version].

Authors:  H M Jacobs; A Luttik; F W Touw-Otten; R A de Melker
Journal:  Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd       Date:  1990-10-06

3.  Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation.

Authors:  R A Deyo; P Diehr; D L Patrick
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1991-08

4.  The French version of the Nottingham Health Profile. A comparison of items weights with those of the source version.

Authors:  D Bucquet; S Condon; K Ritchie
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1990       Impact factor: 4.634

5.  [Value of the sickness impact profile as outcome measure].

Authors:  R A de Melker; F Touw-Otten; H M Jacobs; A Luttik
Journal:  Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd       Date:  1990-05-12

6.  The Sickness Impact Profile as a measure of the health status of noncognitively impaired nursing home residents.

Authors:  M L Rothman; S Hedrick; T Inui
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1989-03       Impact factor: 2.983

7.  Measuring health status: a new tool for clinicians and epidemiologists.

Authors:  S M Hunt; J McEwen; S P McKenna
Journal:  J R Coll Gen Pract       Date:  1985-04

8.  The development of a short generic version of the Sickness Impact Profile.

Authors:  A F de Bruin; J P Diederiks; L P de Witte; F C Stevens; H Philipsen
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 6.437

9.  The Dutch version of the Nottingham Health Profile: investigations of psychometric aspects.

Authors:  R A Erdman; J Passchier; M Kooijman; D L Stronks
Journal:  Psychol Rep       Date:  1993-06

10.  Reliability of a population survey tool for measuring perceived health problems: a study of patients with osteoarthrosis.

Authors:  S M Hunt; S P McKenna; J Williams
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1981-12       Impact factor: 3.710

View more
  5 in total

1.  Perceived health in a population based sample of victims of the 1956 polio epidemic in the Netherlands.

Authors:  F Nollet; B Ivanyi; A Beelen; R J De Haan; G J Lankhorst; M De Visser
Journal:  J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 10.154

2.  The Nottingham Health Profile: score distribution, internal consistency and validity in asthma and COPD patients.

Authors:  M P Jans; F G Schellevis; J T van Eijk
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1999-09       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Factor analysis, causal indicators and quality of life.

Authors:  P M Fayers; D J Hand
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Psychometric properties of questionnaires evaluating health-related quality of life and functional status in polytrauma patients with lower extremity injury.

Authors:  Lian Jansen; Martijn Pm Steultjens; Herman R Holtslag; Gert Kwakkel; Joost Dekker
Journal:  J Trauma Manag Outcomes       Date:  2010-06-28

5.  Health status profile and health-related quality of life of veterans attending an out-patient clinic.

Authors:  Meheroz H Rabadi; Andrea S Vincent
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2013-05-22
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.