scholarly journals Test–Retest Reliability of Health-Related Quality-of-Life Questionnaires in Adults with Strabismus

2010 ◽  
Vol 149 (4) ◽  
pp. 672-676 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Leske ◽  
Sarah R. Hatt ◽  
Jonathan M. Holmes
2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustav Jarl ◽  
Marie Holmefur ◽  
Liselotte MN Hermansson

Background:The Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey consists of five modules to assess outcomes of orthotic and prosthetic interventions: lower extremity functional status, upper extremity functional status, client satisfaction with device, client satisfaction with services and health-related quality of life.Objectives:To investigate the test–retest reliability and calculate the smallest detectable difference for all modules of the Swedish Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey.Study design:Test–retest reliability study design.Methods:A total of 69 patients at a Department of Prosthetics and Orthotics completed Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey on two occasions separated by a 2-week interval, giving 18 answers on lower extremity functional status, 41 on upper extremity functional status, 53 on client satisfaction with device, 12 on client satisfaction with services and 67 answers on health-related quality of life. Raw scores were converted into Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey units on a 0–100 scale. Intra-class correlation coefficients, Bland–Altman plots, common person linking plots and t-tests of person mean measures were used to investigate the reliability. The 95% confidence level smallest detectable differences were calculated.Results:The intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.77 to 0.96 for the modules, and no systematic differences were detected between the response occasions. The smallest detectable differences ranged from 7.4 to 16.6 units.Conclusions:The test–retest reliability was satisfactory for all Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey modules. The smallest detectable difference was large on all modules except the health-related quality of life module.Clinical relevanceThe Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey modules are reliable and, thus, can be recommended for repeated measurements of patients over time. Relatively large changes are needed to achieve statistical significance when assessing individual patients.


2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 505-514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karina Maria Cancelliero-Gaiad ◽  
Daniela Ike ◽  
Liliana Soave ◽  
Evelim Leal de Freitas Dantas Gomes ◽  
Fernanda Dultra Dias ◽  
...  

Objective To correlate functional capacity test scores from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) subjects with their functional state as assessed by health-related quality of life questionnaires (one respiratory disease-specific [SGRQ] and one generic [SF-36] questionnaire). Materials and methods Study of a case series of 8 COPD patients. The following tests were performed: 1) Six-minute walk test (6-MWT); 2) Shuttle walking test (SWT); 3) Six-minute step test (6-MST); 4) Two-minute sit-to-stand test (STST); and 5) Pegboard and ring test (PBRT). Besides these tests, two health-related quality of life questionnaires were administered: The St George's Respiratory Questionnaire (SGRQ) and the Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey questionnaire. The statistical analysis was carried out by using the Shapiro-Wilk normality test, while correlations were assessed using Pearson's (parametric data) or Spearman's (non-parametric data) rank tests, with p < 0.05. Results The 6-MWT showed strong correlation with the SF-36 scales of physical functioning, general health, vitality, social functioning and mental health. Conversely, the other functional capacity tests showed no correlation with this questionnaire. The SGRQ showed no correlation with any of the tests. Conclusions The 6-MWT may be a good test to reflect the health-related quality of life of COPD subjects.


2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 84-94 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cory E Noble ◽  
Lesley M Wiseman-Orr ◽  
Marian E Scott ◽  
Andrea M Nolan ◽  
Jacky Reid

Objectives The objective of this study was to develop a valid, reliable, web-based generic feline health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) questionnaire instrument to measure the affective impact of chronic disease. Methods A large initial item pool, obtained through interviews with cat owners, was reduced using predetermined criteria, survey scores for relevance and clarity, and the ability of individual items to discriminate between healthy and sick cats when owners completed a prototype questionnaire. Using these data, factor analysis was used to derive a scoring algorithm and provide evidence for factorial validity. Validity was demonstrated further in a field trial using a ‘known groups’ approach (sick vs healthy cats will have a different HRQoL profile, and the HRQoL profile of cats will deteriorate as comorbidities increase). Test–retest reliability was assessed using intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs). Results In total, 165 items were reduced to 20 and, on the basis of a factor analysis that explained 72.3% of the variation in scores input by 71 owners of 30 healthy and 41 sick cats using the prototype, these were allocated to three domains (vitality, comfort and emotional wellbeing [EWB]) with a scoring algorithm derived using item loadings. Subsequently, the owners of 36 healthy and 58 sick cats completed one or two (n = 48) assessments. Median scores (healthy vs sick) for all domains were significantly different ( P <0.001), 78% of cats were correctly classified as healthy or sick and for comorbidities the correlation coefficients were moderate (vitality 0.64; comfort 0.63; EWB 0.50). Test–retest reliability was good (ICC vitality 0.635; comfort 0.716; EWB 0.853). Conclusions and relevance This study provides initial evidence for the validity and reliability of a novel HRQoL instrument to aid the assessment and management of chronic diseases of cats.


2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 1239-1249 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary E. Cooley ◽  
Ruth McCorkle ◽  
George J. Knafl ◽  
Joan Rimar ◽  
Margaret J. Barbieri ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document