Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

LIVE: Thursday 2nd May 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)

Quality sleep is essential for health. But what happens to our brains when sleep patterns are disturbed? Join our experts to explore the interplay between sleep disruption and neurological diseases, and the questions that you need to be asking your patients to help you prevent the harmful effects of sleep deprivation.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Quality of Life Research
Published in: Quality of Life Research 9/2010

Open Access 01-11-2010

Five-year stability in associations of health-related quality of life measures in community-dwelling older adults: the Rancho Bernardo Study

Authors: Claudia Der-Martirosian, Donna Kritz-Silverstein, Elizabeth Barrett-Connor

Published in: Quality of Life Research | Issue 9/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

This study examines the five-year stability of the association of SF-12 and SF-6D scores with scores on the longer SF-36 and its domains in community-dwelling older men and women.

Methods

Participants were 653 men and 917 women aged 50 and older who completed mailed surveys of HRQOL (1995, 2000). SF-36 physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component scores, domain scores; SF-12 PCS and MCS scores; and SF-6D scores were computed.

Results

Average age in 1995 was 68.2 ± 10.7 for men and 69.8 ± 11.3 for women. In 1995 and 2000, men had significantly higher scores on all measures (P’s < 0.001). Sex-specific Pearson correlations of SF-12 PCS and MCS scores with SF-36 PCS and MCS scores ranged from 0.91 to 0.97 (P’s < 0.000). Health utility scores (SF-6D) were also associated with SF-36 PCS and MCS scores, but correlations were lower, ranging from 0.61 to 0.79 (P’s < 0.000). Age-stratified comparisons of 5-year change scores for SF-36 PCS showed significant declines in physical health for both men and women within all four age-groups (50–59, 60–69, 70–79, 80+) with steepest declines in the oldest age-group (age 80+). Over time, mental health scores showed significant modest improvement in the younger age-groups but declines in men >70 and women >80 years. The SF-6D scores improved somewhat for the youngest men and women but mean change scores declined for the other age-groups.

Conclusion

Similar conclusions would result using either instrument SF-12 or SF-36. However, SF-6D and SF-36 assess, at least in part, different underlying aspects of HRQOL. Both age and sex impact HRQOL.
Literature
1.
Khanna, D., & Tsevat, J. (2007). Health related quality of life—an introduction. American Journal of Managed Care, 13, S218–S223.PubMed
2.
Ware, J. E., Jr., & Gandek, B. (1998). Overview of the SF-36 health survey and the international quality of life assessment (IQOLA) project. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 903–912.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Prescott-Clarke, P., & Pimatesta, P. (1998). Health survey for England’96. Vol I: Findings and Vol II: Methodology and documentation. London: HMSO.
4.
Kroenke, C. H., Kubzansky, L. D., Adler, N., et al. (2008). Prospective change in health-related quality of life and subsequent mortality among middle-aged and older women. American Journal of Public Health, 98(11), 2085–2091.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Ferrucci, L., Guralnik, J. M., Studenski, S., et al. (2004). Designing randomized, controlled trials aimed at preventing or delaying functional decline and disability in frail, older persons: a consensus report. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52, 625–634.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Brazier, J. E., Harper, R., Jones, H. M., et al. (1992). Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ, 305, 160–164.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1996). A 12-item short-form health survey, construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Medical Care, 34, 220–233.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Pickard, A. S., Johnson, J. A., Penn, A., et al. (1999). Replicability of SF-36 summary scores by the SF-12 in stroke patients. Stroke, 30, 1213–1217.PubMed
9.
Petrou, S., Morrell, J., & Spiby, H. (2009). Assessing the empirical validity of alternative mult-attribute utility measures in the maternity context. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, 7.
10.
Ackerman, R. T., Edelsteiin, S. L., Venkat, K. M., et al. (2009). Changes in health state utilities with changes in body mass in the diabetes prevention program. Obesity, 114, 1–6.
11.
Brazier, J., Roberts, J., & Deverill, M. (2002). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-36. Journal of Health Economics, 21, 271–292.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Brazier, J., Usherwook, T., Harper, R., et al. (1998). Deriving a preference-based single index from the UK SF-36 health survey. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 1115–1128.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Cote, I., Gregoire, J. P., Moisan, J., et al. (2004). Quality of life in hypertension: the SF-12 compared to the SF-36. Canadian Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 11(2), e232–e238.PubMed
14.
Muller-Nordhorn, J., Roll, S., & Willich, S. N. (2004). Comparison of the short-form (SF)-12 health status instrument with the SF-36 in patients with coronary heart disease. Heart, 90, 523–527.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Hurst, N. P., Ruta, D. A., & Kind, P. (1998). Comparison of the MOS Short Form-12 (SF12) health status questionnaire with the SF36 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. British Journal of Rheumatology, 37, 862–869.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Thomsen, D. K., Mehlsen, M. Y., Olesen, F., et al. (2003). Is there an association between rumination and self-reported physical health? One year follow-up in a young and elderly sample. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 27(3), 215–231.CrossRef
17.
Everard, K. M., Lach, H. W., Fisher, E. D., et al. (2000). Relationship of activity and social support to the functional health of older adults. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 55B(4), S208–S212.
18.
Andersen, E. M., Bowley, N., Rothenberg, B. M., et al. (1996). Test-retest performance of a mailed version of the medical outcomes study 36-iterm short-form health survey. Medical Care, 34(2), 1165–1170.CrossRef
19.
Criqui, M. E., Barrett-Connor, E., & Austin, M. (1978). Differences between responders and non-responders in a population-based in a cardiovascular disease study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 108, 367–372.PubMed
20.
McHorney, C. A., Ware, J. E., Jr, Lu, J. F. R., et al. (1994). The MOS 36-items short form health survey (SF-36): III: Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Medical Care, 32, 40–63.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Keller, S. D. (1994). SF-36 physical and mental health summary scales: A user’s manual. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.
22.
Brazier, J., & Roberts, J. (2004). The estimation of a preference-based measure of health from the SF-12. Medical Care, 42, 851–859.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Myint, P. K., Luben, R. N., Surtees, P. G., et al. (2009). Effect of age and sex on relationship between different socioeconomic indices and self-reported functional health in the EPIC-Norfolk population-based study. AEP, 19(5), 289–297.PubMed
24.
Myint, P. H., Luben, R. N., Surtees, P. G., et al. (2007). Self-reported mental health related quality of life and mortality in men and women in the European prospective investigation into cancer (EPIC-Norfolk): A prospective population study. Psychosomatic Medicine, 69, 410–414.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Hemingway, H., Stafford, M., Stansfeld, S., et al. (1997). Is the SF-36 a valid measure of change in population health? Results from the Whitehall II study. BMJ, 315, 1273–1279.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Five-year stability in associations of health-related quality of life measures in community-dwelling older adults: the Rancho Bernardo Study
Authors
Claudia Der-Martirosian
Donna Kritz-Silverstein
Elizabeth Barrett-Connor
Publication date
01-11-2010
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Quality of Life Research / Issue 9/2010
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Electronic ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9700-y

Other articles of this Issue 9/2010

Quality of Life Research 9/2010 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Patient treatment satisfaction after switching to NovoMix® 30 (BIAsp 30) in the IMPROVE™ study: an analysis of the influence of prior and current treatment factors

BriefCommunication

Validity and reliability of the Bengali version of the Hepatitis Quality of Life Questionnaire

OriginalPaper

Patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) domain names and definitions revisions: further evaluation of content validity in IRT-derived item banks

OriginalPaper

Quality of life for head and neck cancer patients treated by combined modality therapy: the therapeutic benefit of technological advances in radiotherapy

OriginalPaper

Confirmatory factor analysis of the validity of the SF-12 for persons with and without a history of stroke

OriginalPaper

Health- and oral health-related quality of life among preschool children with cerebral palsy