Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Content comparison of osteoporosis-targeted health status measures in relation to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Rheumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The most frequently used instruments for health-related quality of life (HRQL) in patients with osteoporosis are the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO-41) and the Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire (OPAQ 2.0 and OPAQ SV). Since HRQL- and International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)-based approaches have both strengths and weaknesses, it is expected that they will be used simultaneously in clinical practice and research. Therefore, we investigated the relationship between osteoporosis-targeted instruments and the ICF. All three selected instruments cover body functions, including pain in back and emotional functions. Sleep functions and energy are represented in the QUALEFFO-41 and OPAQ 2.0 but not in the OPAQ SV. Body structures and environmental factors are covered only by the OPAQ 2.0 and OPAQ SV. The ICF provides an excellent framework when comparing the content of osteoporosis-targeted HRQL instruments and may be useful when selecting health status instruments for clinical studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Silverman SL (1992) The clinical consequences of vertebral compression fractures. Bone 13 [Suppl]:S27–S31

  2. Nevitt MC, Ettinger B, Black DM et al (1998) The association of radiographically detected vertebral fractures with back pain and function: a prospective study. Ann Intern Med118:793–800

    Google Scholar 

  3. Murrell P, Todd CJ, Martin A et al (2001) Postal administration compared with nurse-supported administration of the QUALEFFO-41 in a population sample: comparison of results and assessment of psychometric properties. Working Party for Quality of Life of the International Osteoporosis Foundation. Osteoporos Int 12:672–679

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Silverman SL, Mason J, Greenwald M (1993) The Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire (OPAQ): a reliable and valid self-assessment measure of quality of life in osteoporosis (abstract 904). J Bone Miner Res 8 [Suppl 1]:s343

  5. Tosteson AN, Hammond CS (2002) Quality-of-life assessment in osteoporosis: health-status and preference-based measures. Pharmacoeconomics 20:289–303

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. World Health Organization (2001) International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. ICF WHO, Geneva

  7. Stucki G, Cieza A, Ewert T et al (2002) Application of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in clinical practice. Disabil Rehabil 24:281–282

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cieza A, Brockow T, Ewert T et al (2002) Linking health-status measurements to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. J Rehabil Med 34:1–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lips P, Agnusdei D, Caulin F et al (1996) The development of a European questionnaire for quality of life in patients with vertebral osteoporosis. Scan J Rheumatol 103 [Suppl]:84–88

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lips P, Cooper C, Agnusdei D et al (1997) Quality of life as outcome in the treatment of osteoporosis; the development of a questionnaire for quality of life by the European Foundation for Osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 7:36–38

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lips P, Cooper C, Agnusdei D et al (1999) Quality of life in patients with vertebral fractures: validation of the Quality of Life Questionnaire of the European Foundation for Osteoporosis (QUALEFFO). Osteoporos Int 10:150–160

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Oleksik A, Lips P, Dawson A et al (2000) Health-related quality of life in postmenopausal women with low BMD with or without prevalent vertebral fractures. J Bone Miner Res 15:1384–1392

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Randell AG, Bhalerao N, Nguyen TV et al (1998) Quality of life in osteoporosis: reliability, consistency and validity of the Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire. J Rheumatol 25:1171–1179

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Silverman SL, Minshall M (1997) Principal component factor analysis of quality of life in patients with osteoporotic vertebral fracture(s) (abstract F553). J Bone Miner Res 12 [Suppl 1]:S364

  15. Silverman SL (2000) The Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire (OPAQ): a reliable and valid disease-targeted measure of health-related quality of life (HRQL) in osteopororsis. Qual Life Res 9:767–774

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Shen W, Silverman SL, Minshall ME et al (1999) Measuring health related quality of life in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: development and validation of a short version of the Osteoporosis Assessment Questionnaire. J Bone Miner Res 14 [Suppl 1]:T259

  17. Badia X, Prieto L, Roset M et al (2002) Development of a short osteoporosis quality of life questionnaire by equating items from two existing instruments. J Clin Epidemiol 55:32–40

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kessler RC, Mroczek DK (1995) Measuring the effects of medical interventions. Med Care 33 [Suppl 4]:AS109–AS119

    Google Scholar 

  19. McHorney CA. Generic health measurement: past accomplishments and a measurement paradigm for the 21st century. Ann Intern Med 1997;127(8 Pt 2):743–50

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sinaki M, Mikkelsen BA (1984) Postmenopausal spinal osteoporosis: flexion versus extension exercises. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 65:593–596

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sinaki M (1998) Musculoskeletal challenges of osteoporosis. Aging (Milano) 10:249–262

  22. Cummings SR, Melton J III (2002) Epidemiology and outcomes of osteoporotic fractures. Lancet 359:1761–1766

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Randell AG, Nguyen TV, Bhalerao N et al (2000) Deterioration in quality of life following hip fracture: a prospective study. Osteoporos Int 11:460–466

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Delmas PD (2002) Treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. Lancet 359:2018–2026

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Hauselman HJ, Rizzoli R (2003) A comprehensive review of treatments for postmenopausal osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 14:2–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cranney A, Guyatt G, Griffith L et al (2002) Summary of metaanalysis of therapies. Endocr Rev 23:570–578

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gold DT, Lyles KW, Shipp KM et al (2001) Osteoporosis and its nonskeletal consequences: their impact on treatment decisions. In: Marcus R, Feldman D, Kelsey J (eds) Osteoporosis, 2nd edn. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 479–484

  28. Gillespie LD, Gillespie WJ, Robertson MC et al (2001) Interventions for preventing falls in elderly people. Cochrane Review, Cochrane Library, issue 3, Oxford, update software

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany

    Michael Borchers, Tanja Sigl & Gerold Stucki

  2. ICF Research Branch of the WHO FIC CC (DIMDI), IMBK, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich, Germany

    Alarcos Cieza, Barbara Kollerits & Gerold Stucki

  3. Classification, Assessment, Surveys and Terminology Team, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland

    Nenad Kostanjsek

Authors
  1. Michael Borchers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alarcos Cieza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tanja Sigl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Barbara Kollerits
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nenad Kostanjsek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Gerold Stucki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gerold Stucki.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Borchers, M., Cieza, A., Sigl, T. et al. Content comparison of osteoporosis-targeted health status measures in relation to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Clin Rheumatol 24, 139–144 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-004-0991-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067-004-0991-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation