Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften E-learning Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
UITGEBREID ZOEKEN
Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 9/2018

13-06-2018

Evaluation of the internal and external responsiveness of Short Form-12 Health Survey version 2 (SF-12v2) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Auteurs: Eric Yuk Fai Wan, Edmond Pui Hang Choi, Esther Yee Tak Yu, Weng Yee Chin, Colman Siu Cheung Fung, Anca Ka Chun Chan, Cindy Lo Kuen Lam

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 9/2018

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

The evidence on the responsiveness of the Short Form-12 Health Survey version 2 (SF-12v2) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is limited. The aim of this study was to examine both the internal and external responsiveness of the SF-12 measures in Chinese patients with T2DM.

Methods

A prospective longitudinal observational study was conducted on 1443 T2DM patients managed in public primary care clinics between 2012 and 2013. These patients were surveyed at baseline and at 12 months using SF-12v2. The internal responsiveness was evaluated by linear mixed effect models. Meanwhile, the external responsiveness was tested by multiple linear regression models and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis.

Results

The internal responsiveness of the SF-12v2 to detect negative change was satisfactory among T2DM patients in worsened group, but only the general health domain of SF-12v2 could detect positive change among T2DM patients with improved group. For external responsiveness, the SF-12v2 detected a significant difference-in-difference between patients with worsened and stable/improved group, but not between patients with stable and improved group. The areas under the ROC curve for all domains and summary scales of the SF-12v2 were not statistically different from 0.7.

Conclusion

This study showed that the responsiveness of SF-12v2 might not achieve the standard. Despite the wide use of the SF-12v2, we would like to urge that both clinicians and researchers should use it with caution in longitudinal study.
vorige artikel Validity of the PROMIS depression and anxiety common metrics in an online sample of Australian adults
volgende artikel Refining and supplementing candidate measures of psychological well-being for the NIH PROMIS®: qualitative results from a mixed cancer sample
Literatuur
1.
International Diabetes Federation. (2015). IDF diabetes Atlas (7th ed.). Brussels: International Diabetes Federation.
2.
Zimmet, P., Alberti, K., & Shaw, J. (2001). Global and societal implications of the diabetes epidemic. Nature, 414(6865), 782–787.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Rubin, R. R., & Peyrot, M. (1999). Quality of life and diabetes. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews, 15(3), 205–218.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Redekop, W. K., Koopmanschap, M. A., Stolk, R. P., Rutten, G. E., Wolffenbuttel, B. H., & Niessen, L. W. (2002). Health-related quality of life and treatment satisfaction in Dutch patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care, 25(3), 458–463.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zhang, X., Norris, S. L., Chowdhury, F. M., Gregg, E. W., & Zhang, P. (2007). The effects of interventions on health-related quality of life among persons with diabetes: A systematic review. Medical Care, 45(9), 820–834.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Nair, R., & Kachan, P. (2017). Outcome tools for diabetes-specific quality of life. Canadian Family Physician, 63(6), e310–e315.PubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Lam, C. L., Eileen, Y., & Gandek, B. (2005). Is the standard SF-12 health survey valid and equivalent for a Chinese population? Quality of Life Research, 14(2), 539–547.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Amir, M., Lewin-Epstein, N., Becker, G., & Buskila, D. (2002). Psychometric properties of the SF-12 (Hebrew version) in a primary care population in Israel. Medical Care, 40(10), 918–928.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Gandhi, S. K., Salmon, J. W., Zhao, S. Z., Lambert, B. L., Gore, P. R., & Conrad, K. (2001). Psychometric evaluation of the 12-item short-form health survey (SF-12) in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Clinical Therapeutics, 23(7), 1080–1098.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Choi, E. P., Lam, C. L., & Chin, W.-Y. (2014). The health-related quality of life of Chinese patients with lower urinary tract symptoms in primary care. Quality of Life Research, 23(10), 2723–2733.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Revicki, D. A., Osoba, D., Fairclough, D., Barofsky, I., Berzon, R., Leidy, N. K., & Rothman, M. (2000). Recommendations on health-related quality of life research to support labeling and promotional claims in the United States. Quality of Life Research, 9(8), 887–900.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Wan, E. Y. F., Fung, C. S. C., Wong, C. K. H., Choi, E. P. H., Jiao, F. F., Chan, A. K. C., Chan, K. H. Y., & Lam, C. L. K. (2017). Effectiveness of a multidisciplinary risk assessment and management programme—diabetes mellitus (RAMP-DM) on patient-reported outcomes. Endocrine, 55(2), 416–426.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Ell, K., Katon, W., Xie, B., Lee, P.-J., Kapetanovic, S., Guterman, J., & Chou, C.-P. (2010). Collaborative care management of major depression among low-income, predominantly Hispanic subjects with diabetes: A randomized controlled trial. Diabetes Care, 33(4), 706–713.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Ciccone, M. M., Aquilino, A., Cortese, F., Scicchitano, P., Sassara, M., Mola, E., Rollo, R., Caldarola, P., Giorgino, F., & Pomo, V. (2010). Feasibility and effectiveness of a disease and care management model in the primary health care system for patients with heart failure and diabetes (Project Leonardo). Vascular Health and Risk Management, 6, 297.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Testa, M. A., & Nackley, J. F. (1994). Methods for quality-of-life studies. Annual Review of Public Health, 15, 535–559.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Revicki, D. A., Cella, D., Hays, R. D., Sloan, J. A., Lenderking, W. R., & Aaronson, N. K. (2006). Responsiveness and minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 4, 70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
Husted, J. A., Cook, R. J., Farewell, V. T., & Gladman, D. D. (2000). Methods for assessing responsiveness: A critical review and recommendations. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 53(5), 459–468.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Fung, C. S., Chin, W. Y., Dai, D. S., Kwok, R. L., Tsui, E. L., Wan, Y. F., Wong, W., Wong, C. K., Fong, D. Y., & Lam, C. L. (2012). Evaluation of the quality of care of a multi-disciplinary risk factor assessment and management programme (RAMP) for diabetic patients. BMC Family Practice, 13(1), 116.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Lam, C. L. K., Wong, C. K. H., Lam, E. T. P., & Lo, Y. Y. (2010). Population norm of Chinese (HK) SF-12 Health Survey_Version 2 of Chinese adults in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Practitioner, 32, 77–86.
20.
Lam, C. L. K., Tse, E. Y., & Gandek, B. (2005). Is the standard SF-12 health survey valid and equivalent for a Chinese population? Quality of Life Research, 14(2), 539–547.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Choi, E. P., Wong, C. K., Tsu, J. H., Chin, W., Kung, K., Wong, C. K., & Yiu, M. (2016). Health-related quality of life of Chinese patients with prostate cancer in comparison to general population and other cancer populations. Supportive Care in Cancer, 24(4), 1849–1856.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Kamper, S. J., Maher, C. G., & Mackay, G. (2009). Global rating of change scales: A review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design. Journal of Manual & Manipulative Therapy, 17(3), 163–170.CrossRef
23.
Beaton, D. E., Hogg-Johnson, S., & Bombardier, C. (1997). Evaluating changes in health status: Reliability and responsiveness of five generic health status measures in workers with musculoskeletal disorders. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 50(1), 79–93.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Juniper, E. F., Guyatt, G. H., Willan, A., & Griffith, L. E. (1994). Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific Quality of Life Questionnaire. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 47(1), 81–87.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Wright, J. G., & Young, N. L. (1997). A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 50(3), 239–246.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Stavem, K., Frøland, S. S., & Hellum, K. B. (2005). Comparison of preference-based utilities of the 15D, EQ-5D and SF-6D in patients with HIV/AIDS. Quality of Life Research, 14(4), 971–980.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Marra, C. A., Rashidi, A. A., Guh, D., Kopec, J. A., Abrahamowicz, M., Esdaile, J. M., Brazier, J. E., Fortin, P. R., & Anis, A. H. (2005). Are indirect utility measures reliable and responsive in rheumatoid arthritis patients? Quality of Life Research, 14(5), 1333–1344.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Gerhards, S. A., Huibers, M. J., Theunissen, K. A., de Graaf, L. E., Widdershoven, G. A., & Evers, S. M. (2011). The responsiveness of quality of life utilities to change in depression: A comparison of instruments (SF-6D, EQ-5D, and DFD). Value in Health, 14(5), 732–739.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Choi, E. P., Chin, W. Y., Lam, C. L., & Wan, E. Y. (2015). The responsiveness of the International Prostate Symptom Score, Incontinence Impact Questionnaire-7 and Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale-21 in patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 71(8), 1857–1870.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Choi, E. P., Wong, C. K., Wan, E. Y., Tsu, J. H., Chin, W., Kung, K., & Yiu, M. (2016). The internal and external responsiveness of Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) and Short Form-12 Health Survey version 2 (SF-12 v2) in patients with prostate cancer. Quality of Life Research, 25(9), 2379–2393.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Wong, C. K., Lam, C. L., Law, W.-L., Poon, J. T., Kwong, D. L., Tsang, J., & Wan, Y.-F. (2013). Condition-specific measure was more responsive than generic measure in colorectal cancer: All but social domains. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 66(5), 557–565.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Revicki, D., Hays, R. D., Cella, D., & Sloan, J. (2008). Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61(2), 102–109.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34.
Guyatt, G., Walter, S., & Norman, G. (1987). Measuring change over time: Assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 40(2), 171–178.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Liang, M. H., Fossel, A. H., & Larson, M. G. (1990). Comparisons of five health status instruments for orthopedic evaluation. Medical Care, 28(7), 632–642.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Efron, B. (1987). Better bootstrap confidence intervals. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82(397), 171–185.CrossRef
37.
Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Lam, C., Wong, C., Lam, E., Lo, Y., & Huang, W. (2010). Population norm of Chinese (HK) SF-12 health survey-version 2 of Chinese adults in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Practitioner, 32(2), 77–86.
39.
Lewis-Beck, M., Bryman, A. E., & Liao, T. F. (2003). The Sage encyclopedia of social science research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
40.
Chin, W. Y., Choi, E. P., Chan, K. T., & Wong, C. K. (2015). The psychometric properties of the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale in Chinese primary care patients: Factor structure, construct validity, reliability, sensitivity and responsiveness. PLoS ONE, 10(8), e0135131.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metagegevens
Titel
Evaluation of the internal and external responsiveness of Short Form-12 Health Survey version 2 (SF-12v2) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus
Auteurs
Eric Yuk Fai Wan
Edmond Pui Hang Choi
Esther Yee Tak Yu
Weng Yee Chin
Colman Siu Cheung Fung
Anca Ka Chun Chan
Cindy Lo Kuen Lam
Publicatiedatum
13-06-2018
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 9/2018
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1908-2

Andere artikelen Uitgave 9/2018

Quality of Life Research 9/2018 Naar de uitgave

OriginalPaper

SF-6D population norms for the Hong Kong Chinese general population

OriginalPaper

Changes in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) dimensions associated with community-based musculoskeletal physiotherapy: a multi-centre analysis

OriginalPaper

The relationship between alexithymia and headache impact: the role of somatization and pain catastrophizing

OriginalPaper

WHO disability assessment schedule 2.0 is related to upper and lower extremity disease-specific quality of life

OriginalPaper

Diabetes symptoms predictors of health-related quality of life in adolescents and young adults with type 1 or type 2 diabetes

OriginalPaper

Combining online and in-person methods to evaluate the content validity of PROMIS fatigue short forms in rheumatoid arthritis