Comparing the SF-12 and SF-36 health status questionnaires in patients with and without obesity

Christina C Wee, Roger B Davis, Mary Beth Hamel, Christina C Wee, Roger B Davis, Mary Beth Hamel

Abstract

Objective: To assess how well the SF-36, a well-validated generic quality of life (QOL) instrument, compares with its shorter adaptation, the SF-12, in capturing differences in QOL among patients with and without obesity.

Methods: We compared the correlation between the physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary measures of the SF-12 and SF-36 among 356 primary care patients using Pearson coefficients (r) and conducted linear regression models to see how these summary measures captures the variation across BMI. We used model R2 to assess qualitatively how well each measure explained the variation across BMI.

Results: Correlations between SF-12 and SF-36 were higher for the PCS in obese (r = 0.89) compared to overweight (r = 0.73) and normal weight patients (r = 0.75), p < 0.001, but were similar for the MCS across BMI. Compared to normal weight patients, obese patients scored 8.8 points lower on the PCS-12 and 5.7 points lower on the PCS-36 after adjustment for age, sex, and race; the model R2 was higher with PCS-12 (R2 = 0.22) than with PCS-36 (R2 = 0.16). BMI was not significantly associated with either the MCS-12 or MCS-36.

Conclusion: The SF-12 correlated highly with SF-36 in obese and non-obese patients and appeared to be a better measure of differences in QOL associated with BMI.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Correlation Between the Physical Component Summary (PCS) Measures of the SF-12 and SF-36.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Correlation Between the Mental Component Summary (MCS) Measures of the SF-12 and SF-36.

References

    1. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Dewey JE. How to Score Version Two of the SF-36® Health Survey. Lincoln (RI): QualityMetric Incorporated; 2000.
    1. Ballantyne GH. Measuring outcomes following bariatric surgery: weight loss parameters, improvement in co-morbid conditions, change in quality of life and patient satisfaction. Obes Surg. 2003;13:954–64. doi: 10.1381/096089203322618867.
    1. Horchner R, Tuinebreijer MW, Kelder PH. Quality-of-life assessment of morbidly obese patients who have undergone a Lap-Band operation: 2-year follow-up study. Is the MOS SF-36 a useful instrument to measure quality of life in morbidly obese patients? Obes Surg. 2001;11:212–8. doi: 10.1381/096089201321577901.
    1. Corica Francesco, Corsonello Andrea, Apolone Giovanni, Lucchetti Maria, Melchionda Nazario, Marchesini Giulio, the Quovadis study group Construct Validity of the Short Form-36 Health Survey and Its Relationship with BMI in Obese Outpatients. Obesity. 2006;14:1429–1437.
    1. Kolotkin RL, Head S, Hamilton M, Tse CTJ. Assessing impact of weight on quality of life. Obes Res. 1995;3:49–56.
    1. Kolotkin RL, Head S, Brookhart A. Construct validity of the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life questionnaire. Obes Res. 1997;5:434–441.
    1. Oria HE, Morehead MK. Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System (BAROS) Obes Surg. 1998;8:487–499. doi: 10.1381/096089298765554043.
    1. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-12: how to score the SF-12 physical and mental health summary scales. 3. Lincoln (RI): QualityMetric Incorporated; 1998.
    1. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-item short-form health survey. Med Care. 1996;34:220–3. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003.
    1. Muller-Nordhorn J, Roll S, Willich SN. Comparison of the short form (SF)-12 health status instrument with the SF-36 in patients with coronary heart disease. Heart. 2004;90:523–7. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2003.013995.
    1. Jenkinson C, Layte R, Jenkinson D, Lawrence K, Petersen S, Paice C, Stradling J. A shorter form health survey: can the SF-12 replicate results from the SF-36 in longitudinal studies? J Public Health Med. 1997;19:179–86.
    1. Hurst NP, Ruta DA, Kind P. Comparison of the MOS short form-12 (SF12) health status questionnaire with the SF36 in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol. 1998;37:862–9. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/37.8.862.
    1. Wee CC, Hamel MB, Davis RB, Phillips RS. Assessing the value of weight loss among primary care patients. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19:1206–11. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.40063.x.
    1. Wee CC, Davis RB, Phillips RS. Stage of readiness to control weight and adopt weight control behaviors in primary care. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20:410–5. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.0074.x.
    1. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute . Clinical Guidelines on the Identification, Evaluation, and Treatment of Overweight and Obesity in the United States. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes ofHealth, NHLBI; 1998. pp. 1–228.
    1. Scholfield MJ, Mishra G. Validity of the SF-12 compared with the SF-36 health survey in pilot studies of the Australian longitudinal study on women's health. J Health Psychol. 1998;3:259–71. doi: 10.1177/135910539800300209.
    1. Zar JH. Biostatistical Analysis. 4. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 1999. pp. 390–392.
    1. Katz DA, McHorney CA, Atkinson RL. Impact of obesity on health-related quality of life in patients with chronic illness. J Gen Intern Med. 2000;15:789–96. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.90906.x.
    1. Yancy WS, Jr, Olsen MK, Westman EC, Bosworth HB, Edelman D. Relationship between obesity and health-related quality of life in men. Obes Res. 2002;10:1057–64.
    1. Finkelstein MM. Body mass index and quality of life in a survey of primary care patients. J Fam Pract. 2000;49:734–7.
    1. Rowland ML. Self-reported weight and height. Am J Clin Nutr. 1990;52:1125–33.
    1. Jefferey RW. Bias in reported body weight as a function of education, occupation, health and weight concern. Addict Behav. 1996;21:217–222. doi: 10.1016/0306-4603(95)00050-X.
    1. Villanueva EV. The validity of self-reported weight in US adults: a population based cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health. 2001;1:11. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-1-11.
    1. McHorney CA, Kosinski M, Ware JJ. Comparisons of the costs and quality of norms for the SF-36 health survey collected by mail versus telephone interview: results from a national survey. Medical Care. 1994;32:551–67. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199406000-00002.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe