			Home About us Contact

Impact Measurement Scales (impact + measurement_scale)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Medical Sciences	100%

Selected Abstracts

Patient-assessed health outcome measures for diabetes: a structured review

DIABETIC MEDICINE, Issue 1 2002
A. M. Garratt
Abstract Aims To identify available disease-specific measures of health-related quality of life (HRQL) for diabetes and to review evidence for the reliability, validity and responsiveness of instruments. Methods Systematic searches were used to identify instruments. Instruments were assessed against predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Letters were sent to authors requesting details of further instrument evaluation. Information relating to instrument content, patients, reliability, validity and responsiveness to change was extracted from published papers. Results The search produced 252 references. Nine instruments met the inclusion criteria: Appraisal of Diabetes Scale (ADS), Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life (ADDQoL), Diabetes Health Profile (DHP-1, DHP-18), Diabetes Impact Measurement Scales (DIMS), Diabetes Quality of Life Measure (DQOL), Diabetes-Specific Quality of Life Scale (DSQOLS), Questionnaire on Stress in Diabetic Patients-Revised (QSD-R), Diabetes-39 (D-39) and Well-being Enquiry for Diabetics (WED). The shortest instrument (ADS) has seven items and the longest (WED) has 50 items. The ADS and ADDQoL are single-index measures. The seven multidimensional instruments have dimensions covering psychological well-being and social functioning but vary in the remainder of their content. The DHP-1 and DSQOLS are specific to Type 1 diabetes patients. The DHP-18 is specific to Type 2 diabetes patients. The DIMS and DQOL have weaker evidence for reliability and internal construct validity. Patients contributed to the content of the ADDQoL, DHP-1/18, DQOL, DSQOLS, D-39, QSD-R and WED. The authors of the ADDQoL, DHP-1/18, DQOL, DSQOLS gave explicit consideration to content validity. The construct validity of instruments was assessed through comparisons with instruments measuring related constructs and clinical and sociodemographic variables. None of the instruments has been formally assessed for responsiveness to changes in health. Conclusions Five of the diabetes-specific instruments have good evidence for reliability and internal and external construct validity: the ADDQoL, DHP-1/18, DSQOLS, D-39 and QSD-R. Instrument content should be assessed for relevance before application. The instruments should be evaluated concurrently for validity and responsiveness to important changes in health. [source]

The utility of the Dutch Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2 for assessing health status in individuals with haemophilia: a pilot study

HAEMOPHILIA, Issue 6 2000
N. L. U. Van Meeteren
The aim of this pilot study was to examine the usefulness of the Dutch version of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2 (D-AIMS2)in assessing the health status of Dutch individuals with haemophilia. Sixty-eight individuals with mild, moderate, and severe haemophilia attending our clinic for their annual check-up participated. They first completed the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). The D-AIMS2 was filled in afterwards at home. With the COPM, individuals rated their specific problematic activities of daily life (ADL), as well as the severity and importance of each problem. The D-AIMS2 is a comprehensive, self-administered questionnaire that evaluates functional health status. Fifty-seven individuals completed and returned the D-AIMS2. Reliability analysis demonstrated good internal consistency for the scales (Cronbach's ,=0.76,1.00), as well as for the components (,=0.80,0.88), except for the component ,social interaction' (,=0.44). Criterion validity of the D-AIMS2 was assessed by comparison with COPM outcomes; 80% of the problematic ADLs were included in the questionnaire, 20% were missing. Correlations between the D-AIMS2 components ,physical health' and ,symptoms' with predicted scores of those individuals by a highly experienced physiotherapist (r=0.63 and 0.53, respectively) substantiated its concurrent validity. Based on these results we concluded that the D-AIMS2, with minor adjustments, can be an appropriate tool for assessing the health status of Dutch haemophilia patients. [source]

Measuring disease activity and functional status in patients with scleroderma and Raynaud's phenomenon

ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATISM, Issue 9 2002
Peter A. Merkel
Objective To document disease activity and functional status in patients with scleroderma (systemic sclerosis [SSc]) and Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) and to determine the sensitivity to change, reliability, ease of use, and validity of various outcome measures in these patients. Methods Patients with SSc and moderate-to-severe RP participating in a multicenter RP treatment trial completed daily diaries documenting the frequency and duration of RP attacks and recorded a daily Raynaud's Condition Score (RCS). Mean scores for the 2-week periods prior to baseline (week 0), end of trial (week 6), and posttrial followup (week 12) were calculated. At weeks 0, 6, and 12, physicians completed 3 global assessment scales and performed clinical assessments of digital ulcers and infarcts; patients completed the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ), the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2 (AIMS2) mood and tension subscales, 5 specific SSc/RP-related visual analog scales (VAS), and 3 other VAS global assessments. We used these measures to document baseline disease activity and to assess their construct validity, sensitivity to change, and reliability in trial data. Results Two hundred eighty-one patients (248 women, 33 men; mean age 50.4 years [range 18,82 years]) from 14 centers participated. Forty-eight percent had limited cutaneous SSc; 52% had diffuse cutaneous SSc. Fifty-nine patients (21%) had digital ulcers at baseline. Patients had 3.89 ± 2.33 (mean ± SD) daily RP attacks (range 0.8,14.6), with a duration of 82.1 ± 91.6 minutes/attack. RCS for RP activity (possible range 0,10) was 4.30 ± 1.92. HAQ scores (0,3 scale) indicated substantial disability at baseline (total disability 0.86, pain 1.19), especially among the subscales pertaining to hand function (grip, eating, dressing). AIMS2 mood and tension scores were fairly high, as were many of the VAS scores. Patients with digital ulcers had worse RCS, pain, HAQ disability (overall, grip, eating, and dressing), physician's global assessment, and tension, but no significant difference in the frequency of RP, duration of RP, patient's global assessment, or mood, compared with patients without digital ulcers. VAS scores for digital ulcers as rated by the patients were not consistent with the physician's ratings. Factor analysis of the 18 measures showed strong associations among variables in 4 distinct domains: disease activity, RP measures, digital ulcer measures, and mood/tension. Reliability of the RCS, HAQ pain and disability scales, and AIMS2 mood and tension subscales was high. The RP measures demonstrated good sensitivity to change (effect sizes 0.33,0.76). Conclusion Our findings demonstrate that the significant activity, disability, pain, and psychological impact of RP and digital ulcers in SSc can be measured by a small set of valid and reliable outcome measures. These outcome measures provide information beyond the quantitative metrics of RP attacks. We propose a core set of measures for use in clinical trials of RP in SSc patients that includes the RCS, patient and physician VAS ratings of RP activity, a digital ulcer/infarct measure, measures of disability and pain (HAQ), and measures of psychological function (AIMS2). [source]