Original ArticleComparison of the Responsiveness of the SF-36 and WOMAC in Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty
Section snippets
Human Subjects
This project was approved by the Institutional Review Board at the UCLA School of Medicine. Informed consent was obtained from all patients before participation.
Patient Sample
Patients were recruited through the joint replacement clinic at the UCLA School of Medicine. Patients were included if they presented with a chronic arthritic condition requiring total hip arthroplasty. Patients were excluded if their indication for surgery was acutely traumatic or due to fracture. In addition, revision arthroplasty
Patient Sample
Eighty-nine patients were recruited and had adequate data to allow complete scoring of the WOMAC and SF-36 for the preoperative visit and minimum 5-month postoperative follow-up. The patients included in the study consisted of 48 women (54%) and 41 men (46%). The mean age of the patient sample was 60 years (range, 20-91 years).
The mean follow-up period between surgery and final questionnaire administration was 17 months (range, 5-43 months). Thirty-three patients completed follow-up
Discussion
This study demonstrated an adequate level of responsiveness to clinical change after total hip arthroplasty of several components of the SF-36 when compared with the disease-specific WOMAC. Specifically, there was evidence that the physical functioning subscale, PCS Scale, and bodily pain subscale of the SF-36 have a level of responsiveness similar to that seen with the WOMAC in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. This suggests that the isolated use of the SF-36 may be sufficient to
References (28)
- et al.
The accuracy of assessing total hip arthroplasty outcomes
J Arthroplasty
(2000) - et al.
Outcome after total hip arthroplasty
J Arthroplasty
(1997) - et al.
Evaluating quality-of-life and health status instruments: development of scientific review criteria
Clin Ther
(1996) - et al.
Evaluating changes in health status: reliability and responsiveness of five generic health status measures in workers with musculoskeletal disorders
J Clin Epidemiology
(1997) - et al.
Assessing the reliability and responsiveness of 5 shoulder questionnaires
J Shoulder Elbow Surg
(1998) The WOMAC knee and hip osteoarthritis indices: development, validation, globalization and influence on the development of the AUSCAN hand osteoarthritis indices
Clin Exp Rheum
(2005)- et al.
Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after hip joint replacement
Osteoarthritis Cartilage
(2005) - et al.
Validity and reliability of Swedish WOMAC osteoarthritis index
Acta Orthop Scand
(2000) - et al.
The SF-36 health survey as a generic outcome measure in clinical trials of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and score reliability
Med Care
(1999) SF-36 health survey manual and interpretation guide
(1994)
SF-36 Physical and mental health summary scales: a user's manual
Responsiveness of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index as compared with the SF-36 in patients with osteoarthritis of the legs undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation intervention
Ann Rheum Dis
Evaluating measurement responsiveness
J Rheum
Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status
Med Care
Cited by (26)
Is There a Relation between AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Score and SF-36 in Evaluation of Achilles Ruptures Treated by Percutaneous Technique?
2014, Journal of Foot and Ankle SurgeryWhat predicts 36-item health survey version 2 after total hip arthroplasty
2013, Archives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationCitation Excerpt :Another limitation was the use of the SF-36v2 questionnaire alone to assess HRQOL. Although some studies38,41 have recommended that the SF-36 be used in combination with other questionnaires to investigate HRQOL after THA, others have stated that the use of the SF-36 alone is acceptable.42 The fact that our survey used only the SF-36 does not therefore mean that it was inadequate.
Health-Related Quality of Life After Total Joint Arthroplasty. A Scoping Review
2012, Clinics in Geriatric MedicineCitation Excerpt :Unlike generic measures, the ability to make comparisons between different populations (eg, diseases) with specific measures of HRQL is limited.12 In this review 16 studies13–28 reviewed used the WOMAC and another 4 studies used the Oxford hip and knee scores29–32 to evaluate joint-specific changes after total joint arthroplasty. Seven studies of THA13,16,17,21,25–27 (Table 1) and nine studies of TKA14,15,18,19,20,22–24,28 (Table 2) assessed outcomes using the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index.
Comparison of Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Cohorts and Short-Term Outcomes From a Single-Center Joint Registry
2012, Journal of ArthroplastyOutcome measures in placebo-controlled trials of osteoarthritis: Responsiveness to treatment effects in the REPORT database
2011, Osteoarthritis and CartilageCitation Excerpt :Our results are based on a meta-analysis of clinical trials that were conducted using different research designs, treatments, and outcomes, an approach that has also been used recently to evaluate the “discriminating power” of outcome measures in clinical trials of fibromyalgia38. A different approach to examining the assay sensitivity of outcome measures involves evaluating treatment effects and SESs in a single clinical trial in which each patient completes all of the measures and patient-level data, rather than the group means used in our analyses, provide the basis for comparing measures29,39–41. However, the generalizability of such results is potentially limited by specific features of the clinical trial, including patient demographic and clinical characteristics and study methodology (e.g., trial duration42) as well as the specific treatment examined.
No benefits or funds were received in support of the study.