Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 58, Issue 8 , Pages 791-801, August 2005

A study compared nine patient-specific indices for musculoskeletal disorders

  • Brigitte M. Jolles

      Affiliations

    • Hôpital Orthopédique de la Suisse Romande, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois CHUV, University of Lausanne, 4, Avenue Pierre Decker, 1005 Lausanne, Switzerland
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.:+41-21-545-0629; fax:+41-21-545-0625.
  • ,
  • Rachelle Buchbinder

      Affiliations

    • Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Cabrini Hospital and Monash University Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  • ,
  • Dorcas E. Beaton

      Affiliations

    • Mobility Program Clinical Research Unit, St Michael's Hospital, Institute for Work and Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Accepted 7 January 2005.

Abstract 

Background and Objective

Patient-specific quality of life indices show great potential, but certain conceptual and methodological concerns have yet to be fully addressed. The present study reviewed nine patient-specific instruments used in musculoskeletal disorders: the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), Juvenile Arthritis Quality of life Questionnaire (JAQQ), McMaster–Toronto Arthritis questionnaire (MACTAR), Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP), Patient-Specific Index (PASI) for total hip arthroplasty, Problem Elicitation Technique (PET), Patient Generated Index (PGI) of quality of life, Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS), and Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life (SEIQoL).

Study Design and Setting

Each tool was evaluated for purpose, content validity, face validity, feasibility, psychometric properties, and responsiveness.

Results

This critical appraisal revealed important differences in terms of the concept underlying these indices, the domains covered, the item-generation techniques and the scoring (response scale, methods) in each scale. The nine indices would generate different responses and likely scores for the same patient, despite the fact that they all include patient-generated items.

Conclusion

Although the value of these indices in treatment planning and monitoring at an individual level is strong, more studies are needed to improve our understanding of how to interpret the numeric scores of patient-specific indices at both an individual and a group level.

Keywords: Patient-specific index, Questionnaires, Outcome assessment, Quality of life, Patient satisfaction, Psychometrics

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0895-4356(05)00111-3

doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.01.012

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 58, Issue 8 , Pages 791-801, August 2005