SF-12v2与SF-36v2在成都市居民人群中的等效性评价
|
摘要
目的根据SF-12量表研制初衷,探讨SF-12v2与SF-36v2在评价成都市居民人群生命质量中的等效性。方法通过信度、效度和反应度等方面来评价SF-12v2与SF-36v2的等效性。结果 SF-36v2与SF-12v2的8个维度分数范围分别是64.13~89.15和47.45~87.92,SF-12v2各维度的标准差增大。两量表均无地板效应;但在生理功能(PF)、生理职能(RP)、身体疼痛(BP)、社会功能(SF)、情感职能(RE)维度有较高的天花板效应,分别是50.14%~63.87%和56.66%~68.32%之间,且SF-12V2高于SF-36v2对应维度。SF-36v2和SF-12v2各维度的Cronbach’sα分别在0.60~0.97和0.51~0.94之间,复测信度范围分别是0.61~0.85和0.55~0.80;因子分析均提取两个公因子代表生理和心理健康,解释SF-36v2和SF-12v2累积方差贡献分别为64.05%和55.79%;SF-12v2的PCS、MCS分数解释SF-36v2领域分数总变异R2分别为91.0%和80.3%;PCS-12和PCS-36对不同健康状况人群的效应尺度在0.78~2.77之间,MCS-12和MCS-36较低,在0.00~0.57之间;PCS-12与PCS-36相对效度(RV)在0.89~0.94之间,MCS-12与MCS-36在0.60~0.75之间。结论SF-12v2作为SF-36v2的简化版量表在成都市居民生命质量评价中具有较好的信度、效度和反应度,测量结构基本符合原量表测量模型,PCS-12对PCS-36和MCS-12对MCS-36有较好的等效性,但由于SF-12条目减少,各个维度分数精确性下降,不推荐计算维度分数。
Objective To determine the equivalence of SF-12 v2 and SF-36 v2 for assessing health related quality of life in a general population in Chengdu.Methods The equivalence between SF-12 v2 and SF-36 v2 was assessed using reliability,validity and responsiveness.Results The eight sub-scales of SF-36 v2 had a score ranging from 64.13 to 89.15,compared with a range between 47.45 and 87.92 for SF-12 v2.The SF-12 v2 had larger standard deviations than the SF-36 v2.No floor effects were detected;but ceiling effects were significant in the subscales of physical functioning(PF),role-physical(RP),bodily pain(BP),social functioning(SF)and role emotion(RE).The SF-12 v2 had higher ceiling effects(56.66%-68.32%)than the SF-36 v2(50.14%-63.87%).The exploratory factor analyses extracted two factors in both cases,representing physical(PCS)and mental health(MCS),respectively.The total variances explained by the common factors reached 64.05% for the SF-36 v2 and55.79%for the SF-12 v2.The SF-12 v2 PCS and MCS scores explained 91.0% and 80.3% of the total variances of those of the SF-36 v2,respectively.The effect size of PCSs ranges from 0.78 to 2.77 in the subpopulations with different health conditions,compared with 0.00-0.57 for MSCs.The relative validity(RV)of PCS-12 to PCS-36 ranged from 0.89 to 0.94,compared with a MCS-12 to MCS-36 range of 0.60-0.75.Conclusion SF-12 v2 is reliable and valid as a brief substitute version of SF-36 v2 with acceptable responsiveness and equitable structure for assessing health related quality of life in the general population of Chengdu.But sub-scale scores were not recommended when using the SF-12 v2 due to reduced precision.
Objective To determine the equivalence of SF-12 v2 and SF-36 v2 for assessing health related quality of life in a general population in Chengdu.Methods The equivalence between SF-12 v2 and SF-36 v2 was assessed using reliability,validity and responsiveness.Results The eight sub-scales of SF-36 v2 had a score ranging from 64.13 to 89.15,compared with a range between 47.45 and 87.92 for SF-12 v2.The SF-12 v2 had larger standard deviations than the SF-36 v2.No floor effects were detected;but ceiling effects were significant in the subscales of physical functioning(PF),role-physical(RP),bodily pain(BP),social functioning(SF)and role emotion(RE).The SF-12 v2 had higher ceiling effects(56.66%-68.32%)than the SF-36 v2(50.14%-63.87%).The exploratory factor analyses extracted two factors in both cases,representing physical(PCS)and mental health(MCS),respectively.The total variances explained by the common factors reached 64.05% for the SF-36 v2 and55.79%for the SF-12 v2.The SF-12 v2 PCS and MCS scores explained 91.0% and 80.3% of the total variances of those of the SF-36 v2,respectively.The effect size of PCSs ranges from 0.78 to 2.77 in the subpopulations with different health conditions,compared with 0.00-0.57 for MSCs.The relative validity(RV)of PCS-12 to PCS-36 ranged from 0.89 to 0.94,compared with a MCS-12 to MCS-36 range of 0.60-0.75.Conclusion SF-12 v2 is reliable and valid as a brief substitute version of SF-36 v2 with acceptable responsiveness and equitable structure for assessing health related quality of life in the general population of Chengdu.But sub-scale scores were not recommended when using the SF-12 v2 due to reduced precision.
引文
[1]WARE JE,CD S.The MOS 36-item short-form health survey(SF-36):Ⅰ.conceptual framework and item selection.Med Care,1992,30(6):473-483.
[2]WARE JE.SF-36health survey update//MARUISH ME.The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment:volume 3.Landen:Routledge,2004:693-718.
[3]TAFT C,KARLSSON J,SULLIVAN M.Performance of the Swedish SF-36version 2.0.Qual Life Res,2004,13(1):251-256.
[4]JENKINSON C,STEWART-BROWN S,PETERSEN S,et al.Assessment of the SF-36 version 2 in the United Kingdom.J Epidemiol Community Health,1999,53(1):46-50.
[5]刘嵘,高倩,李净海,等.农村留守居民生命质量SF-36第二版信效度评价.中国公共卫生,2012,28(4):541-542.
[6]陈天辉,李鲁,SINGLE JM,等.健康相关生命质量测量工具SF-36第二版和第一版的比较.中国社会医学杂志,2006,23(2):111-114.
[7]赵龙超,刘志军,何燕,等.简明健康状况调查问卷第二版评价成都市城镇居民生命质量适用性研究.中华预防医学杂志,2014,48(5):370-374.
[8]李鹃,王宏.SF-36量表第二版应用于重庆市区居民生命质量研究的信效度检验.第四军医大学学报,2009,30(14):1342-1344.
[9]侯金泓,徐应军,刘俊江.SF36-Ⅱ在血液透析患者中信度,效度,敏感度的评价.现代预防医学,2007,34(14):2646-2648.
[10]WARE JE.User’s manual for the SF-36v2health survey.Lincoln,RI:Quality Metric Incorporated,2007:29-37.
[11]WARE JE,KOSINSKI M,KELLER SD.A 12-Item ShortForm Health Survey:construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity.Med Care,1996,34(3):220-233.
[12]JENKINSON C,LAYTE R.Development and testing of the UK SF-12(short form health survey).J Health Serv Res Dolicy,1997,2(1):14-18.
[13]MONTAZERI A,VAHDANINIA M,MOUSAVI SJ,et al.The Iranian version of 12-item Short Form Health Survey(SF-12):factor structure,internal consistency and construct validity.BMC Public Health,2009,9(1):341-351.
[14]YOUNSI M,CHAKROUN M.Measuring health-related quality of life:psychometric evaluation of the Tunisian version of the SF-12health survey.Qual Life Res,2014,23(7):2047-2054.
[15]BUSIJA L,PAUSENBERGER E,HAINES TP,et al.Adult measures of general health and health-related quality of life:Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-Item(SF-36)and Short Form 12-Item(SF-12)Health Surveys,Nottingham Health Profile(NHP),Sickness Impact Profile(SIP),Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 6D(SF-6D),Health Utilities Index Mark 3(HUI3),Quality of Well-Being Scale(QWB),and Assessment of Quality of Life(AQoL).Arthritis Care Res(Hoboken),2011,63(Suppl 11):S383-S412.
[16]LIM CL,FISHER J.Use of the 12-item short-form(SF-12)Health Survey in an Australian heart and stroke population.Qual Life Res,1999,8(1/2):1-8.
[17]LAM CL,EILEEN Y,GANDEK B.Is the standard SF-12health survey valid and equivalent for a Chinese population?Qual Life Res,2005,14(2):539-547.
[18]WARE JE,KOSINSKI M,TURNER-BOWKER DM,et al.User’s Manual for the SF-12v2Health Survey.Lincoln,RI:Quality Metric Incorporated,2002:29-38.
[19]STEWART AL.Measuring functioning and well-being:the medical outcomes study approach.Durham,NC:Duke University Press,1992:15-22.
[20]NUNNALLY JC,BERNSTEIN I.The assessment of reliability.Psychometric Theory,1994,3(1):248-292.
[21]MCHORNEY CA,WARE JE,LU JR,et al.The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey(SF-36):Ⅲ.Tests of data quality,scaling assumptions,and reliability across diverse patient groups.Medical Care,1994,32(1):40-66.
[22]刘朝杰.问卷的信度与效度评价.中国慢性病预防与控制,1997,5(4):32-35.
[23]JENKINSON C,LAYTE R,JENKINSON D,et al.A shorter form health survey:can the SF-12replicate results from the SF-36in longitudinal studies?J Public Health,1997,19(2):179-186.
[24]朱燕波.生命质量(QOL)测量与评价.北京:人民军医出版社,2010:58-61.
[25]GUYATT G,WALTER S,NORMAN G.Measuring change over time:assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments.J Chronic Dis,1987,40(2):171-178.
[26]LAM ET,LAM CL,FONG DY,et al.Is the SF-12version2Health Survey a valid and equivalent substitute for the SF-36version 2 Health Survey for the Chinese?J Eval Clin Pract,2013,19(1):200-208.
[27]CUNILLERA O,TRESSERRAS R,RAJMIL L,et al.Discriminative capacity of the EQ-5D,SF-6D,and SF-12as measures of health status in population health survey.Qual Life Res,2010,19(6):853-864.
[28]KAZIS LE,ANDERSON JJ,MEENAN RF.Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status.Med Care,1989,27(3Suppl):S178-S189.
[29]COHEN J.Statistical power analysis.Curr Dir Psychol Sci,1992,1(3):98-101.
[30]VICKREY BG,HAYS RD,GENOVESE BJ,et al.Comparison of a generic to disease-targeted health-related quality-of-life measures for multiple sclerosis.J Clin Epidemiol,1997,50(5):557-569.
[31]FRIELING MA,DAVIS WR,CHIANG G.The SF-36v2and SF-12v2health surveys in New Zealand:norms,scoring coefficients and cross-country comparisons.Aust N Z J Public Health,2013,37(1):24-31.
[32]MARUISH ME.User’s manual for the SF-36v2 Health Survey(3rd ed.).Lincoln,RI:Quality Metric Incorporated,2011:19.
[33]GROUP W.The World Health Organization quality of life assessment(WHOQOL):development and general psychometric properties.Soc Sci Med,1998,46(12):1569-1585.
[34]GROUP W.Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment.Psychol Med,1998,28(3):551-558.
[35]KONERDING U.Some problems with determining the reliability of the EQ-5D-3L:commentary to“Value of EQ-5D in Mexican city older population with and without dementia(SADEM study)”.Int J Geriatric Psychiatry,2016,31(1):3-3.
[36]MCHORNEY CA,WARE JE,RACZEK AE.The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey(SF-36):Ⅱ.Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs.Med Care,1993,31(3):247-263.
[37]WARE JE,GANDEK B.Overview of the SF-36 health survey and the international quality of life assessment(IQOLA)project.J Clin Epidemiol,1998,51(11):903-912.
[2]WARE JE.SF-36health survey update//MARUISH ME.The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes assessment:volume 3.Landen:Routledge,2004:693-718.
[3]TAFT C,KARLSSON J,SULLIVAN M.Performance of the Swedish SF-36version 2.0.Qual Life Res,2004,13(1):251-256.
[4]JENKINSON C,STEWART-BROWN S,PETERSEN S,et al.Assessment of the SF-36 version 2 in the United Kingdom.J Epidemiol Community Health,1999,53(1):46-50.
[5]刘嵘,高倩,李净海,等.农村留守居民生命质量SF-36第二版信效度评价.中国公共卫生,2012,28(4):541-542.
[6]陈天辉,李鲁,SINGLE JM,等.健康相关生命质量测量工具SF-36第二版和第一版的比较.中国社会医学杂志,2006,23(2):111-114.
[7]赵龙超,刘志军,何燕,等.简明健康状况调查问卷第二版评价成都市城镇居民生命质量适用性研究.中华预防医学杂志,2014,48(5):370-374.
[8]李鹃,王宏.SF-36量表第二版应用于重庆市区居民生命质量研究的信效度检验.第四军医大学学报,2009,30(14):1342-1344.
[9]侯金泓,徐应军,刘俊江.SF36-Ⅱ在血液透析患者中信度,效度,敏感度的评价.现代预防医学,2007,34(14):2646-2648.
[10]WARE JE.User’s manual for the SF-36v2health survey.Lincoln,RI:Quality Metric Incorporated,2007:29-37.
[11]WARE JE,KOSINSKI M,KELLER SD.A 12-Item ShortForm Health Survey:construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity.Med Care,1996,34(3):220-233.
[12]JENKINSON C,LAYTE R.Development and testing of the UK SF-12(short form health survey).J Health Serv Res Dolicy,1997,2(1):14-18.
[13]MONTAZERI A,VAHDANINIA M,MOUSAVI SJ,et al.The Iranian version of 12-item Short Form Health Survey(SF-12):factor structure,internal consistency and construct validity.BMC Public Health,2009,9(1):341-351.
[14]YOUNSI M,CHAKROUN M.Measuring health-related quality of life:psychometric evaluation of the Tunisian version of the SF-12health survey.Qual Life Res,2014,23(7):2047-2054.
[15]BUSIJA L,PAUSENBERGER E,HAINES TP,et al.Adult measures of general health and health-related quality of life:Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-Item(SF-36)and Short Form 12-Item(SF-12)Health Surveys,Nottingham Health Profile(NHP),Sickness Impact Profile(SIP),Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 6D(SF-6D),Health Utilities Index Mark 3(HUI3),Quality of Well-Being Scale(QWB),and Assessment of Quality of Life(AQoL).Arthritis Care Res(Hoboken),2011,63(Suppl 11):S383-S412.
[16]LIM CL,FISHER J.Use of the 12-item short-form(SF-12)Health Survey in an Australian heart and stroke population.Qual Life Res,1999,8(1/2):1-8.
[17]LAM CL,EILEEN Y,GANDEK B.Is the standard SF-12health survey valid and equivalent for a Chinese population?Qual Life Res,2005,14(2):539-547.
[18]WARE JE,KOSINSKI M,TURNER-BOWKER DM,et al.User’s Manual for the SF-12v2Health Survey.Lincoln,RI:Quality Metric Incorporated,2002:29-38.
[19]STEWART AL.Measuring functioning and well-being:the medical outcomes study approach.Durham,NC:Duke University Press,1992:15-22.
[20]NUNNALLY JC,BERNSTEIN I.The assessment of reliability.Psychometric Theory,1994,3(1):248-292.
[21]MCHORNEY CA,WARE JE,LU JR,et al.The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey(SF-36):Ⅲ.Tests of data quality,scaling assumptions,and reliability across diverse patient groups.Medical Care,1994,32(1):40-66.
[22]刘朝杰.问卷的信度与效度评价.中国慢性病预防与控制,1997,5(4):32-35.
[23]JENKINSON C,LAYTE R,JENKINSON D,et al.A shorter form health survey:can the SF-12replicate results from the SF-36in longitudinal studies?J Public Health,1997,19(2):179-186.
[24]朱燕波.生命质量(QOL)测量与评价.北京:人民军医出版社,2010:58-61.
[25]GUYATT G,WALTER S,NORMAN G.Measuring change over time:assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments.J Chronic Dis,1987,40(2):171-178.
[26]LAM ET,LAM CL,FONG DY,et al.Is the SF-12version2Health Survey a valid and equivalent substitute for the SF-36version 2 Health Survey for the Chinese?J Eval Clin Pract,2013,19(1):200-208.
[27]CUNILLERA O,TRESSERRAS R,RAJMIL L,et al.Discriminative capacity of the EQ-5D,SF-6D,and SF-12as measures of health status in population health survey.Qual Life Res,2010,19(6):853-864.
[28]KAZIS LE,ANDERSON JJ,MEENAN RF.Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status.Med Care,1989,27(3Suppl):S178-S189.
[29]COHEN J.Statistical power analysis.Curr Dir Psychol Sci,1992,1(3):98-101.
[30]VICKREY BG,HAYS RD,GENOVESE BJ,et al.Comparison of a generic to disease-targeted health-related quality-of-life measures for multiple sclerosis.J Clin Epidemiol,1997,50(5):557-569.
[31]FRIELING MA,DAVIS WR,CHIANG G.The SF-36v2and SF-12v2health surveys in New Zealand:norms,scoring coefficients and cross-country comparisons.Aust N Z J Public Health,2013,37(1):24-31.
[32]MARUISH ME.User’s manual for the SF-36v2 Health Survey(3rd ed.).Lincoln,RI:Quality Metric Incorporated,2011:19.
[33]GROUP W.The World Health Organization quality of life assessment(WHOQOL):development and general psychometric properties.Soc Sci Med,1998,46(12):1569-1585.
[34]GROUP W.Development of the World Health Organization WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment.Psychol Med,1998,28(3):551-558.
[35]KONERDING U.Some problems with determining the reliability of the EQ-5D-3L:commentary to“Value of EQ-5D in Mexican city older population with and without dementia(SADEM study)”.Int J Geriatric Psychiatry,2016,31(1):3-3.
[36]MCHORNEY CA,WARE JE,RACZEK AE.The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey(SF-36):Ⅱ.Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs.Med Care,1993,31(3):247-263.
[37]WARE JE,GANDEK B.Overview of the SF-36 health survey and the international quality of life assessment(IQOLA)project.J Clin Epidemiol,1998,51(11):903-912.