Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 11/2014

01-11-2014

Validation of the SF-36 as a measure of postoperative recovery after colorectal surgery

Authors: Ioana Antonescu, Francesco Carli, Nancy E. Mayo, Liane S. Feldman

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 11/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Surgery is evolving, and new techniques are introduced to improve “recovery.” Postoperative recovery is complex, and evaluating the effectiveness of surgical innovations requires assessment of patient-reported outcomes. The Short-Form-36 (SF-36), a generic health-related quality of life questionnaire, is the most commonly used instrument in this context. The objective of this study was to contribute evidence for the validity of the SF-36 as a metric of postoperative recovery.

Methods

Data from 128 patients undergoing planned colorectal surgery at one university hospital between 2005 and 2010 were analyzed. In the absence of a gold standard, the responsiveness and construct validity (known groups and convergent) of the SF-36 were evaluated. Standardized response means were computed for the former and non-parametric tests were used to assess the statistical significance of the changes observed. Multiple linear regression was used to determine whether the SF-36 discriminates between patients with versus without complications and between laparoscopic and open surgery (known groups); correlations between the SF-36 and the 6-min walk test, a measure of functional walking capacity (convergent) was investigated with Spearman’s rank correlation.

Results

The SF-36 was sensitive to clinically important changes. Scores on six of eight domains and the physical component summary score deteriorated postoperatively (SRM 0.86 for the PCS, p < 0.01) and improved to baseline thereafter. Patients with complications had significantly lower scores on five SF-36 domains (with differences from −9 (−18, −1), p = 0.04 to −18 (−32, −2), p = 0.03), and scores on all subscales were lower than those in a healthy population (p < 0.01 to p = 0.04). The SF-36 did not differentiate between laparoscopic and open surgery. Physical functioning scores correlated with 6MWT distance at 1 and 2 months (Spearman’s r = 0.31 and 0.36, p < 0.01).

Conclusions

The SF-36 is responsive to expected physiological changes in the postoperative period, demonstrates construct validity, and thus constitutes a valid measure of postoperative recovery after planned colorectal surgery. The SF-36 did not, however, discriminate between recovery after laparoscopic and open surgery.
Literature
2.
go back to reference Cheema FN, Abraham NS, Berger DH, Albo D, Taffet GE, Naik AD (2011) Novel approaches to perioperative assessment and intervention may improve long-term outcomes after colorectal cancer resection in older adults. Ann Surg 253(5):867–874PubMedCrossRef Cheema FN, Abraham NS, Berger DH, Albo D, Taffet GE, Naik AD (2011) Novel approaches to perioperative assessment and intervention may improve long-term outcomes after colorectal cancer resection in older adults. Ann Surg 253(5):867–874PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Colavita PD, Tsirline VB, Belyansky I, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Sing RF et al (2012) Prospective, long-term comparison of quality of life in laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair. Ann Surg 256(5):714–722 Discussion 22–3PubMedCrossRef Colavita PD, Tsirline VB, Belyansky I, Walters AL, Lincourt AE, Sing RF et al (2012) Prospective, long-term comparison of quality of life in laparoscopic versus open ventral hernia repair. Ann Surg 256(5):714–722 Discussion 22–3PubMedCrossRef
4.
5.
go back to reference Tsui C, Klein R, Garabrant M (2013) Minimally invasive surgery: national trends in adoption and future directions for hospital strategy. Surg Endosc 27(7):2253–2257PubMedCrossRef Tsui C, Klein R, Garabrant M (2013) Minimally invasive surgery: national trends in adoption and future directions for hospital strategy. Surg Endosc 27(7):2253–2257PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Halabi WJ, Kang CY, Jafari MD, Nguyen VQ, Carmichael JC, Mills S et al (2013) Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in the United States: a nationwide analysis of trends and outcomes. World J Surg 37(12):2782–2790PubMedCrossRef Halabi WJ, Kang CY, Jafari MD, Nguyen VQ, Carmichael JC, Mills S et al (2013) Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery in the United States: a nationwide analysis of trends and outcomes. World J Surg 37(12):2782–2790PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Fierens J, Wolthuis AM, Penninckx F, D’Hoore A (2012) Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol: prospective study of outcome in colorectal surgery. Acta Chir Belg 112(5):355–358PubMed Fierens J, Wolthuis AM, Penninckx F, D’Hoore A (2012) Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol: prospective study of outcome in colorectal surgery. Acta Chir Belg 112(5):355–358PubMed
8.
go back to reference Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, Lipsitz SR, Breizat AH, Dellinger EP et al (2009) A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 360(5):491–499PubMedCrossRef Haynes AB, Weiser TG, Berry WR, Lipsitz SR, Breizat AH, Dellinger EP et al (2009) A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population. N Engl J Med 360(5):491–499PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Lee L, Tran T, Mayo NE, Carli F, Feldman LS (2014) What does it really mean to “recover from an operation”? Surgery 155(2):211–216 Lee L, Tran T, Mayo NE, Carli F, Feldman LS (2014) What does it really mean to “recover from an operation”? Surgery 155(2):211–216
10.
go back to reference Carli F, Zavorsky GS (2005) Optimizing functional exercise capacity in the elderly surgical population. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 8(1):23–32PubMedCrossRef Carli F, Zavorsky GS (2005) Optimizing functional exercise capacity in the elderly surgical population. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care 8(1):23–32PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Kluivers KB, Riphagen I, Vierhout ME, Brolmann HA, de Vet HC (2008) Systematic review on recovery specific quality-of-life instruments. Surgery 143(2):206–215PubMedCrossRef Kluivers KB, Riphagen I, Vierhout ME, Brolmann HA, de Vet HC (2008) Systematic review on recovery specific quality-of-life instruments. Surgery 143(2):206–215PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Ferrans CE, Zerwic JJ, Wilbur JE, Larson JL (2005) Conceptual model of health-related quality of life. J Nurs Sch 37(4):336–342CrossRef Ferrans CE, Zerwic JJ, Wilbur JE, Larson JL (2005) Conceptual model of health-related quality of life. J Nurs Sch 37(4):336–342CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Wilson IB, Cleary PD (1995) Linking clinical variables with health-related quality of life. A conceptual model of patient outcomes. J Am Med Assoc 273(1):59–65CrossRef Wilson IB, Cleary PD (1995) Linking clinical variables with health-related quality of life. A conceptual model of patient outcomes. J Am Med Assoc 273(1):59–65CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Velanovich V (2001) The quality of quality of life studies in general surgical journals. J Am Coll Surg 193(3):288–296PubMedCrossRef Velanovich V (2001) The quality of quality of life studies in general surgical journals. J Am Coll Surg 193(3):288–296PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NM, O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Usherwood T et al (1992) Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ 305(6846):160–164PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NM, O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Usherwood T et al (1992) Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ 305(6846):160–164PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30(6):473–483PubMedCrossRef Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30(6):473–483PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Korolija D, Sauerland S, Wood-Dauphinee S, Abbou CC, Eypasch E, Caballero MG et al (2004) Evaluation of quality of life after laparoscopic surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery. Surg Endosc 18(6):879–897PubMedCrossRef Korolija D, Sauerland S, Wood-Dauphinee S, Abbou CC, Eypasch E, Caballero MG et al (2004) Evaluation of quality of life after laparoscopic surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery. Surg Endosc 18(6):879–897PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Avery KN, Gujral S, Blazeby JM (2008) Patient-reported outcomes to evaluate surgery. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 8(1):43–50PubMedCrossRef Avery KN, Gujral S, Blazeby JM (2008) Patient-reported outcomes to evaluate surgery. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 8(1):43–50PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA (2002) Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol 14(2):109–114PubMedCrossRef Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA (2002) Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol 14(2):109–114PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR (2003) Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 56(5):395–407PubMedCrossRef Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR (2003) Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 56(5):395–407PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Velanovich V (2007) Using quality-of-life measurements in clinical practice. Surgery 141(2):127–133PubMedCrossRef Velanovich V (2007) Using quality-of-life measurements in clinical practice. Surgery 141(2):127–133PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Wongyingsinn M, Baldini G, Charlebois P, Liberman S, Stein B, Carli F (2011) Intravenous lidocaine versus thoracic epidural analgesia: a randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery using an enhanced recovery program. Reg Anesth Pain Med 36(3):241–248PubMedCrossRef Wongyingsinn M, Baldini G, Charlebois P, Liberman S, Stein B, Carli F (2011) Intravenous lidocaine versus thoracic epidural analgesia: a randomized controlled trial in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery using an enhanced recovery program. Reg Anesth Pain Med 36(3):241–248PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Wongyingsinn M, Baldini G, Stein B, Charlebois P, Liberman S, Carli F (2012) Spinal analgesia for laparoscopic colonic resection using an enhanced recovery after surgery programme: better analgesia, but no benefits on postoperative recovery: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Anaesth 108(5):850–856PubMedCrossRef Wongyingsinn M, Baldini G, Stein B, Charlebois P, Liberman S, Carli F (2012) Spinal analgesia for laparoscopic colonic resection using an enhanced recovery after surgery programme: better analgesia, but no benefits on postoperative recovery: a randomized controlled trial. Br J Anaesth 108(5):850–856PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Moriello C, Mayo NE, Feldman L, Carli F (2008) Validating the 6-min walk test as a measure of recovery after elective colon resection surgery. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 89(6):1083–1089PubMedCrossRef Moriello C, Mayo NE, Feldman L, Carli F (2008) Validating the 6-min walk test as a measure of recovery after elective colon resection surgery. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 89(6):1083–1089PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Tarlov AR, Ware JE Jr, Greenfield S, Nelson EC, Perrin E, Zubkoff M (1989) The Medical Outcomes Study. An application of methods for monitoring the results of medical care. J Am Med Assoc 262(7):925–930CrossRef Tarlov AR, Ware JE Jr, Greenfield S, Nelson EC, Perrin E, Zubkoff M (1989) The Medical Outcomes Study. An application of methods for monitoring the results of medical care. J Am Med Assoc 262(7):925–930CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Laboratories ATSCoPSfCPF (2002) ATS statement: guidelines for the 6-min walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 166(1):111–117CrossRef Laboratories ATSCoPSfCPF (2002) ATS statement: guidelines for the 6-min walk test. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 166(1):111–117CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Feldman LS, Kaneva P, Demyttenaere S, Carli F, Fried GM, Mayo NE (2009) Validation of a physical activity questionnaire (CHAMPS) as an indicator of postoperative recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 146(1):31–39PubMedCrossRef Feldman LS, Kaneva P, Demyttenaere S, Carli F, Fried GM, Mayo NE (2009) Validation of a physical activity questionnaire (CHAMPS) as an indicator of postoperative recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Surgery 146(1):31–39PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference White EAB, Saracci R (2008) Principles of exposure measurement in epidemiology. Oxford University Press, LondonCrossRef White EAB, Saracci R (2008) Principles of exposure measurement in epidemiology. Oxford University Press, LondonCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Hopman WM, Towheed T, Anastassiades T, Tenenhouse A, Poliquin S, Berger C et al (2008) Canadian normative data for the SF-36 health survey. Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study Research Group. Can Med Assoc J 163(3):265–271 Hopman WM, Towheed T, Anastassiades T, Tenenhouse A, Poliquin S, Berger C et al (2008) Canadian normative data for the SF-36 health survey. Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study Research Group. Can Med Assoc J 163(3):265–271
31.
go back to reference Copay AG, Subach BR, Glassman SD, Polly DW Jr, Schuler TC (2007) Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J 7(5):541–546PubMedCrossRef Copay AG, Subach BR, Glassman SD, Polly DW Jr, Schuler TC (2007) Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods. Spine J 7(5):541–546PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH (1989) Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10(4):407–415PubMedCrossRef Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH (1989) Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10(4):407–415PubMedCrossRef
34.
go back to reference Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240(2):205–213PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
36.
go back to reference Busija L, Osborne RH, Nilsdotter A, Buchbinder R, Roos EM (2008) Magnitude and meaningfulness of change in SF-36 scores in four types of orthopedic surgery. Health Qual Life Outcomes 6:55PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Busija L, Osborne RH, Nilsdotter A, Buchbinder R, Roos EM (2008) Magnitude and meaningfulness of change in SF-36 scores in four types of orthopedic surgery. Health Qual Life Outcomes 6:55PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
37.
go back to reference Grevitt M, Khazim R, Webb J, Mulholland R, Shepperd J (1997) The short form-36 health survey questionnaire in spine surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79(1):48–52PubMedCrossRef Grevitt M, Khazim R, Webb J, Mulholland R, Shepperd J (1997) The short form-36 health survey questionnaire in spine surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79(1):48–52PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Dunker MS, Bemelman WA, Slors JF, van Duijvendijk P, Gouma DJ (2001) Functional outcome, quality of life, body image, and cosmesis in patients after laparoscopic-assisted and conventional restorative proctocolectomy: a comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 44(12):1800–1807PubMedCrossRef Dunker MS, Bemelman WA, Slors JF, van Duijvendijk P, Gouma DJ (2001) Functional outcome, quality of life, body image, and cosmesis in patients after laparoscopic-assisted and conventional restorative proctocolectomy: a comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 44(12):1800–1807PubMedCrossRef
39.
go back to reference Maartense S, Dunker MS, Slors JF, Cuesta MA, Gouma DJ, van Deventer SJ et al (2004) Hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis: a randomized trial. Ann Surg 240(6):984–991 Discussion 91–2PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Maartense S, Dunker MS, Slors JF, Cuesta MA, Gouma DJ, van Deventer SJ et al (2004) Hand-assisted laparoscopic versus open restorative proctocolectomy with ileal pouch anal anastomosis: a randomized trial. Ann Surg 240(6):984–991 Discussion 91–2PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
40.
go back to reference Maartense S, Dunker MS, Slors JF, Cuesta MA, Pierik EG, Gouma DJ et al (2006) Laparoscopic-assisted versus open ileocolic resection for Crohn’s disease: a randomized trial. Ann Surg 243(2):143–149 Discussion 50–3PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral Maartense S, Dunker MS, Slors JF, Cuesta MA, Pierik EG, Gouma DJ et al (2006) Laparoscopic-assisted versus open ileocolic resection for Crohn’s disease: a randomized trial. Ann Surg 243(2):143–149 Discussion 50–3PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentral
41.
go back to reference Andersen MH, Mathisen L, Veenstra M, Oyen O, Edwin B, Digernes R et al (2007) Quality of life after randomization to laparoscopic versus open living donor nephrectomy: long-term follow-up. Transplantation 84(1):64–69PubMedCrossRef Andersen MH, Mathisen L, Veenstra M, Oyen O, Edwin B, Digernes R et al (2007) Quality of life after randomization to laparoscopic versus open living donor nephrectomy: long-term follow-up. Transplantation 84(1):64–69PubMedCrossRef
42.
go back to reference Urbach DR (2002) Laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colon cancer. J Am Med Assoc 287(15):1938 Author reply 9CrossRef Urbach DR (2002) Laparoscopic-assisted surgery for colon cancer. J Am Med Assoc 287(15):1938 Author reply 9CrossRef
43.
go back to reference Urbach DR, Harnish JL, McIlroy JH, Streiner DL (2006) A measure of quality of life after abdominal surgery. Qual Life Res 15(6):1053–1061PubMedCrossRef Urbach DR, Harnish JL, McIlroy JH, Streiner DL (2006) A measure of quality of life after abdominal surgery. Qual Life Res 15(6):1053–1061PubMedCrossRef
44.
go back to reference Gervaz P, Mugnier-Konrad B, Morel P, Huber O, Inan I (2011) Laparoscopic versus open sigmoid resection for diverticulitis: long-term results of a prospective, randomized trial. Surg Endosc 25(10):3373–3378PubMedCrossRef Gervaz P, Mugnier-Konrad B, Morel P, Huber O, Inan I (2011) Laparoscopic versus open sigmoid resection for diverticulitis: long-term results of a prospective, randomized trial. Surg Endosc 25(10):3373–3378PubMedCrossRef
45.
go back to reference Schwenk W, Haase O, Neudecker J, Muller JM (2005) Short-term benefits for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 3:CD003145PubMed Schwenk W, Haase O, Neudecker J, Muller JM (2005) Short-term benefits for laparoscopic colorectal resection. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 3:CD003145PubMed
Metadata
Title
Validation of the SF-36 as a measure of postoperative recovery after colorectal surgery
Authors
Ioana Antonescu
Francesco Carli
Nancy E. Mayo
Liane S. Feldman
Publication date
01-11-2014
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 11/2014
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3577-8

Other articles of this Issue 11/2014

Surgical Endoscopy 11/2014 Go to the issue