Test–retest reliability of health utilities index scores: Evidence from hip fracture

2005 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 393-398 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Allyson Jones ◽  
David Feeny ◽  
Ken Eng
Keyword(s):  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Global Change ◽  
Generalizability Theory ◽  
Complete Data ◽  
Health Utilities Index ◽  
Change Question ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Health Utilities ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Utility Scores

Objectives:There is relatively little evidence on the test–retest reliability of utility scores derived from multiattribute measures. The objective was to estimate test–retest reliability for Health Utilities Index Mark 2 (HUI2) and Mark 3 (HUI3) utility scores in patients recovering from hip fracture.Methods:We enrolled an inception cohort of hip fracture patients within 3 to 5 days of surgery. Baseline assessments included the Functional Independence Measure (FIM™), Folstein Mini-Mental State Examinations, and the HUI2 and HUI3 questionnaire. Follow-up assessments at 1, 3, and 6 months also included a global change question. Test–retest reliability was assessed as agreement between 3- and 6-month scores using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Two approaches were used to classify patients as stable; a third approach based on the generalizability theory was also used. Patients were classified as stable if their FIM™ overall scores changed by 10 points or fewer and if they classified themselves as having experienced no or only a little change according to their global change question.Results:Complete data at both the 3- and 6-month assessments based on self-report were available for 196 patients; 141 patients with complete data were classified as stable. The ICCs for HUI2 and HUI3 for stable patients were 0.71 and 0.72; the ICCs derived from the generalizability theory were 0.76 and 0.77.Conclusions:Test–retest reliability for HUI in this cohort was similar to reliability estimates for other preference-based multiattribute and generic health-profile measures—in the acceptable range for making valid group-level comparisons.

Utility Scores for the Health Utilities Index Mark 2

Medical Care ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 627-635 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. McCabe ◽  
Katherine J. Stevens ◽  
John E. Brazier
Keyword(s):  
Health Utilities Index ◽  
Health Utilities ◽  
Utility Scores

scholarly journals PAR9 A MODEL TO ESTIMATE HEALTH UTILITIES INDEX MARK 3 UTILITY SCORES FROM WOMAC INDEX SCORES IN PATIENTS WITH OSTEOARTHRITIS OF THE KNEE

2005 ◽  
Vol 8 (6) ◽  
pp. A26-A27
Author(s):  
DA Marshall ◽  
P Grootendorst ◽  
D Pericak ◽  
N Bellamy ◽  
D Feeny ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Osteoarthritis Of The Knee ◽  
Health Utilities Index ◽  
Health Utilities ◽  
Womac Index ◽  
Utility Scores

scholarly journals A new measure of fear of falling: psychometric properties of the fear of falling questionnaire revised (FFQ-R)

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (7) ◽  
pp. 1121-1133 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily S. Bower ◽  
Julie Loebach Wetherell ◽  
C. Caroline Merz ◽  
Andrew J. Petkus ◽  
Vanessa L. Malcarne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Hip Fracture ◽  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Self Efficacy ◽  
Fear Of Falling ◽  
Community Dwelling ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Fracture Group ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

ABSTRACTBackground:Although fear of falling is prevalent among older adults recovering from hip fracture, current instruments are inadequate due to focus on specific situations and measurement of self-efficacy rather than fear.Methods:The authors revised and tested a form of the Fear of Falling Questionnaire with three groups of older adults: 405 recovering from hip fracture, 89 healthy community dwelling, and 42 with severe fear of falling. Test-retest reliability was evaluated in a subsample of 16 hip fracture patients. Internal consistency was compared across all groups. Construct validity was established through factor analysis, convergent validity with a measure of fall-related self-efficacy, and discriminant validity with measures of depression and affect.Results:A revised two-factor, six-item scale appears to have adequate psychometric properties. Scores were lower in the healthy comparison group relative to the hip fracture and fear of falling groups. Cronbach's α ranged from 0.72–0.83, with test-retest reliability of 0.82. Correlations with a measure of fall-related self-efficacy were moderate for the hip fracture group (0.42) and high with the healthy comparison (0.68) and fear of falling (0.70) groups. Correlations with depression and negative and positive affect were low to moderate.Conclusions:The Fear of Falling Questionnaire – Revised shows promise as a self-report measure of fear of falling, and is one of the first to be tested in older adults recovering from hip fracture. Advantages are that it is global rather than situation-specific and measures fear rather than self-efficacy. Future research on this scale is recommended in other older adult samples for whom fear of falling is relevant.

scholarly journals Generalizability Theory Analysis of Balance Error Scoring System Reliability in Healthy Young Adults

2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (5) ◽  
pp. 497-502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven P. Broglio ◽  
Weimo Zhu ◽  
Kay Sopiarz ◽  
Youngsik Park
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Scoring System ◽  
Generalizability Theory ◽  
Learning Effects ◽  
Theory Analysis ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Balance Error Scoring System ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Balance Error ◽  
Overall Reliability

Abstract Context: An assessment of postural control is commonly included in the clinical concussion evaluation. Previous investigators have demonstrated learning effects that may mask concussion-induced balance decrements. Objective: To establish the test-retest reliability of the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS) and to provide recommendations that account for known learning effects. Design: Test-retest generalizability study. Setting: Balance research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: Young adults (n  =  48) free from injuries and illnesses known to affect balance. Intervention(s): Each participant completed 5 BESS trials on each of the assessment dates, which were separated by 50 days. Main Outcome Measure(s): Total score of the BESS was used in a generalizability theory analysis to estimate the overall reliability of the BESS and that of each facet. A decision study was completed to estimate the number of days and trials needed to establish clinical reliability. Results: The overall reliability of the BESS was G  =  0.64. The test-retest reliability was improved when male (0.92) and female (0.91) participants were examined independently. Clinically acceptable reliability (greater than 0.80) was established when 3 BESS trials were administered in a single day or 2 trials were administered at different time points. Conclusions: Learning effects have been noted in individuals with no previous exposure to the BESS. Our findings indicate that clinicians should consider interpreting the mean score from 3 BESS administrations on a given occasion for both normative data comparison and pretest and posttest design. The multiple assessment technique yields clinically reliable scores and provides the sports medicine practitioner with accurate data for clinical decision making.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document