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
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
PharmacoEconomics
Published in: PharmacoEconomics 17/2003

01-12-2003 | Original Research Article

Development and validation of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale-Short Form (DFS-SF)

Authors: Carla M. Bann, Sheri E. Fehnel, Dennis D. Gagnon

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 17/2003

Login to get access

Abstract

Background: The Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale (DFS) provides comprehensive measurement of the impact of diabetic foot ulcers on patients’ QOL through self-administration of 64 items comprising 15 subscales.
Objective: To develop and evaluate a short form of the DFS (DFS-SF) to reduce patient burden and the number of outcome measures, and to improve sensitivity to change in clinical condition.
Methods: The DFS-SF was created through the analysis of data from a doubleblind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of the efficacy and safety of becaplermin (recombinant human platelet-derived growth factor BB) in the treatment of chronic, full-thickness, neuropathic, diabetic foot ulcers. Using these data, items demonstrating poor psychometric properties were eliminated. Exploratory factor analyses were then conducted to develop a new, more parsimonious scaling algorithm that optimised the internal consistency of the new subscales. Finally, data from two additional clinical trials were used to assess replicability of the DFS-SF subscale structure.
Results: The DFS-SF contains a total of 29 items comprising six subscales. The results of both confirmatory and exploratory factor analyses provided support for the scaling algorithm. The DFS-SF subscales showed good internal consistency, reliability and construct validity, and demonstrated sensitivity to ulcer healing.
Conclusions: The results of this investigation indicate that the DFS-SF has good psychometric properties and replicability.
Literature
1.
Moss SE, Klein R, Klein B. The prevalence and incidence of lower extremity amputation in a diabetic population. Arch Intern Med 1992; 152: 610–6PubMedCrossRef
2.
Kumar S, Ashe HA, Parnell LN, et al. The prevalence of foot ulceration and its correlates in type 2 diabetic patients: a population-based study. Diabet Med 1994; 11: 480–4PubMedCrossRef
3.
Palumbo PJ, Melton LJ. Peripheral vascular disease and diabetes. In: Hams MI, Hammon RE editors. Diabetes in America. NIH Publication No.: 85-1468. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1985: 1–21
4.
Pecoraro RE, Reiber GE, Burgess EM. Pathways to diabetic limb amputation: basis for prevention. Diabetes Care 1990; 13: 513–21PubMedCrossRef
5.
Reiber GE, Pecoraro RE, Koepsell TD. Risk factors for amputation in patients with diabetes mellitus: a case control study. Ann Intern Med 1992; 117: 97–105PubMed
6.
Brod M. Quality of life issues in patients with diabetes and lower extremity ulcers: patients and care givers. Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 365–72PubMedCrossRef
7.
Carrington AL, Mawdsley SK, Morley M, et al. Psychological status of diabetic people with or without lower limb disability. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 1996; 32: 19–25PubMedCrossRef
8.
Meijer JWG, Trip J, Jaegers SMHJ, et al. Quality of life in patients with diabetic foot ulcers. Disabil Rehabil 2001; 23: 336–40PubMedCrossRef
9.
Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 Health Survey manual and interpretation guide. Boston (MA): The Health Institute, New England Medical Center, 1993
10.
Roorda LD, Roebroeck ME, Lankhorst GJ, et al. Measuring functional limitations in rising and sitting down: development of a questionnaire. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 77: 663–9PubMedCrossRef
11.
Tennvall GR, Apelqvist J. Health-related quality of life in patients with diabetes mellitus and foot ulcers. J Diabetes Complications 2000; 14: 235–41CrossRef
12.
Abetz L, Sutton M, Brady L, et al. The Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale (DFS): a quality of life instrument for use in clinical trials. Pract Diab Int 2002; 19: 167–75CrossRef
13.
Conway K, Pouget C, Finn P, et al. The cultural validation of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale: methods and issues [abstract]. Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 581
14.
Sutton M, McGrath C, Brady L, et al. Diabetic foot care: assessing the impact of care on the whole patient. Pract Diab Int 2000; 17: 147–51CrossRef
15.
Dielman TE, Cattell RB, Wagner A. Evidence on the simple structure and factor invariance achieved by five rotational methods on four types of data. Mult Beh Res 1972; 7: 223–42CrossRef
16.
Gorsuch RL. A comparison of Biquartimin, Maxplane, Promax, and Varimax. Educ Psychol Meas 1970; 30: 861–72CrossRef
17.
Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951; 6: 297–334CrossRef
18.
Campbell DT, Fiske DW. Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol Bull 1959; 56: 81–105PubMedCrossRef
19.
Hill-Briggs F, Gary TL, Hill MN, et al. Health-related quality of life in urban African Americans with type 2 diabetes. J Gen Intern Med 2002; 17: 412–9PubMedCrossRef
20.
Lee PP, Whitcup SM, Hays RD, et al. The relationship between visual acuity and functioning and well-being among diabetics. Qual Life Res 1995; 4: 319–23PubMedCrossRef
21.
Weinberger M, Kirkman MS, Samsa GP, et al. The relationship between glycemic control and health-related quality of life in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Med Care 1994; 32: 1173–81PubMedCrossRef
22.
23.
Littell RC, Milliken GA, Stroup WW, Wolfinger RD. SAS® system for mixed models. Cary (NC): SAS Institute Inc., 1996
24.
Forsyth BH, Lessler JT, Hubbard ML. Cognitive evaluation of the questionnaire. In: Turner C, Lessler JT, Gfroerer JC, editors. Survey measurement of drug use. Publication No.: 92-1929 Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), 1992: 13–52
25.
Kaiser HF. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educ Psychol Meas 1960; 20: 141–51CrossRef
26.
Thurstone LL. Multiple factor analysis. Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press, 1947
27.
Hatcher L. A step-by-step approach to using the SAS® system for factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Cary (NC): SAS Institute Inc., 1994
28.
Lohr KN, Aaronson NK, Alonso J, et al. Evaluating quality-oflife and health status instruments: development of review scientific criteria. Clin Ther 1996; 18: 979–92PubMedCrossRef
29.
Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995
30.
Jöreskog K, Sörbom D. LISREL® 8: user’s reference guide. Chicago (IL): Scientific Software International, Inc., 1996
31.
Hoyle RH, Panter AT. Writing about structural equation models. In: Hoyle RH, editor. Structural equation modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks (CA): Sage, 1995:158–76
32.
Schumacker RE, Lomax RG. A beginner’s guide to structural equation modeling. Mahwah (NJ): Erlbaum, 1996
33.
Gorsuch RL. Factor analysis. 2nd ed. Hillsdale (NJ): Erlbaum, 1983
34.
Wrigley CS, Neuhaus JO. The matching of two sets of factors. Am Psychol 1955; 10: 418–9
Metadata
Title
Development and validation of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale-Short Form (DFS-SF)
Authors
Carla M. Bann
Sheri E. Fehnel
Dennis D. Gagnon
Publication date
01-12-2003
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics / Issue 17/2003
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200321170-00004