Reliability and Validity of the Short-Form 12 Item Version 2 (SF-12v2) Health-Related Quality of Life Survey and Disutilities Associated with Relevant Conditions in the U.S. Older Adult Population

Chintal H Shah, Joshua D Brown, Chintal H Shah, Joshua D Brown

Abstract

This study aimed to validate the Short-Form 12-Item Survey-version 2 (SF-12v2) in an older (≥65 years old) US population as well as estimate disutilities associated with relevant conditions, using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey longitudinal panel (2014-2015). The physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) scores were examined for reliability (internal consistency, test-retest), construct validity (convergent and discriminant, structural), and criterion validity (concurrent and predictive). The study sample consisted of 1040 older adults with a mean age of 74.09 years (standard deviation: 6.19) PCS and MCS demonstrated high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha-PCS: 0.87, MCS: 0.86) and good and moderate test-retest validity, respectively (intraclass correlation coefficient: PCS:0.79, MCS:0.59)). The questionnaire demonstrated sufficient convergent and discriminant ability. Confirmatory factor analysis showed adequate fit with the theoretical model and structural validity (goodness of fit = 0.9588). Concurrent criterion validity and predictive criterion validity were demonstrated. Activity limitations, functional limitations, arthritis, coronary heart disease, diabetes, myocardial infarction, stroke, angina, and high blood pressure were associated with disutilities of 0.18, 0.15, 0.06, 0.07, 0.07, 0.06, 0.09, 0.06, and 0.08, respectively, and demonstrated the responsiveness of the instrument to these conditions. The SF-12v2 is a valid and reliable instrument in an older US population.

Keywords: Medial Expenditure Panel Survey; SF−12v2; disutility; health-related quality of life; older adults; psychometric properties; quality of life; reliability; utility; validity.

Conflict of interest statement

The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Figure depicting the sample selection process.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Results of confirmatory factor analysis for structural validity of Physical Component Summary Score and Mental Component Summary Score in the Short-Form 12-Item Survey—version 2 among an older (65 years or greater) US population.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Results for concurrent criterion validity of Physical Component Summary Score in the Short-Form 12-Item Survey—version 2 among an older (65 years or greater) US population (PCS score: Physical Component Summary Score; HRQoL-CI PCS: Health-Related Quality of Life Comorbidity Index (Physical Component Score)).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Results for concurrent criterion validity of Mental Component Summary Score in the Short-Form 12-Item Survey—version 2 among an older (65 years or greater) US population (MCS score: Mental Component Summary Score; HRQoL-CI MCS: Health-Related Quality of Life Comorbidity Index (Mental Component Score)).

References

    1. US Census Bureau Population Estimates Show Aging Across Race Groups Differs. [(accessed on 12 July 2019)]; Available online: .
    1. Stewart A., Ware J.E. Measuring Functioning and Well-Being: The Medical Outcomes Study Approach. Duke University Press; Durham, NC, USA: 1992.
    1. Health-Related Quality of Life and Well-Being | Healthy People 2020. [(accessed on 13 February 2019)]; Available online: .
    1. Weinstein M.C., Torrance G., McGuire A. QALYs: The Basics. Value Health. 2009;12:S5–S9. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00515.x.
    1. Clarke P., Gray A., Holman R. Estimating Utility Values for Health States of Type 2 Diabetic Patients Using the EQ−5D (UKPDS 62) Med. Decis. Mak. 2002;22:340–349. doi: 10.1177/027298902400448902.
    1. Bowling A. Measuring Disease: A Review of Disease-Specific Quality of Life Measurement Scales. 2nd ed. Open University Press; Buckingham, PI, USA: 2001.
    1. Patrick D.L., Erickson P. Health Status and Health Policy: Quality of Life in Health Care Evaluation and Resource Allocation. Oxford University Press; New York, USA: 1993.
    1. Ware J., Kosinski M., Keller S.D. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: Construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med. Care. 1996;34:220–233. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003.
    1. Ware J.E., Kosinski M., Turner-Bowker D.M., Gandek B., QualityMetric Incorporated. New England Medical Center Hospital. Health Assessment Lab . How to Score Version 2 of the SF-12 Health Survey (with a Supplement Documenting Version 1) QualityMetric Inc., Health Assessment Lab; Lincoln, RI, USA: Boston, MA, USA: 2002.
    1. Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Home. [(accessed on 2 October 2018)]; Available online:
    1. Der-Martirosian C., Cordasco K.M., Washington D.L. Health-related quality of life and comorbidity among older women veterans in the United States. Qual. Life Res. 2013;22:2749–2756. doi: 10.1007/s11136-013-0424-7.
    1. Pulular A., Levy R., Stewart R. Obsessive and compulsive symptoms in a national sample of older people: Prevalence, comorbidity, and associations with cognitive function. Am. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry. 2013;21:263–271. doi: 10.1016/j.jagp.2012.11.011.
    1. Coulton S., Clift S., Skingley A., Rodriguez J. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of community singing on mental health-related quality of life of older people: Randomised controlled trial. Br. J. Psychiatry. 2015;207:250–255. doi: 10.1192/bjp.bp.113.129908.
    1. Greaves C.J., Farbus L. Effects of creative and social activity on the health and well-being of socially isolated older people: Outcomes from a multi-method observational study. J. R. Soc. Promot. Health. 2006;126:134–142. doi: 10.1177/1466424006064303.
    1. Cheng Y., Goodin A.J., Pahor M., Manini T., Brown J.D. Healthcare Utilization and Physical Functioning in Older Adults in the United States. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2020;68:266–271. doi: 10.1111/jgs.16260.
    1. Cheak-Zamora N.C., Wyrwich K.W., McBride T.D. Reliability and validity of the SF−12v2 in the medical expenditure panel survey. Qual. Life Res. 2009;18:727–735. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9483-1.
    1. Montazeri A., Vahdaninia M., Mousavi S.J., Asadi-Lari M., Omidvari S., Tavousi M. The 12-item medical outcomes study short form health survey version 2.0 (SF−12v2): A population-based validation study from Tehran, Iran. Health Qual. Life Outcomes. 2011;9:12. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-9-12.
    1. Kathe N., Hayes C.J., Bhandari N.R., Payakachat N. Assessment of Reliability and Validity of SF−12v2 among a Diabetic Population. Value Health. 2018;21:432–440. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2017.09.007.
    1. Hayes C.J., Bhandari N.R., Kathe N., Payakachat N. Reliability and Validity of the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form−12 Version 2 (SF−12v2) in Adults with Non-Cancer Pain. Healthcare. 2017;5:22. doi: 10.3390/healthcare5020022.
    1. Gandhi S.K., Salmon J.W., Zhao S.Z., Lambert B.L., Gore P.R., Conrad K. Psychometric evaluation of the 12-item short-form health survey (SF−12) in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Clin. Ther. 2001;23:1080–1098. doi: 10.1016/S0149-2918(01)80093-X.
    1. Kontodimopoulos N., Pappa E., Niakas D., Tountas Y. Validity of SF−12 summary scores in a Greek general population. Health Qual. Life Outcomes. 2007;5:55. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-5-55.
    1. Older Adults | Healthy People 2020. [(accessed on 13 June 2019)]; Available online: .
    1. Sixty-Five Plus in the United States. [(accessed on 13 June 2019)]; Available online: .
    1. SF−12 & SF−12v2 Health Survey. [(accessed on 13 June 2019)]; Available online: .
    1. Ware J.E., Kosinski M., Keller S.D. SF−36 Physical and Mental Health Summary Scales: A User’s Manual. Health Assessment Lab, New England Medical Center; Boston, MA, USA: 1994.
    1. Hanmer J. Predicting an SF−6D Preference-Based Score Using MCS and PCS Scores from the SF−12 or SF−36. Value Health. 2009;12:958–966. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00535.x.
    1. Hall S.F. A user’s guide to selecting a comorbidity index for clinical research. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2006;59:849–855. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.11.013.
    1. Mukherjee B., Ou H.-T., Wang F., Erickson S.R. A new comorbidity index: The health-related quality of life comorbidity index. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2011;64:309–319. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.01.025.
    1. Kroenke K., Spitzer R.L., Williams J.D.B.W. The Patient Health Questionnaire-2: Validity of a two-item depression screener. Med. Care. 2003;41:1284–1292. doi: 10.1097/01.MLR.0000093487.78664.3C.
    1. Kessler R.C., Andrews G., Colpe L.J., Hiripi E., Mroczek D.K., Normand S.-L.T., Walters E.E., Zaslavsky A.M. Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychol. Med. 2002;32:959–976. doi: 10.1017/S0033291702006074.
    1. APA Dictionary of Psychology. [(accessed on 15 June 2019)]; Available online: .
    1. Cronbach L.J. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16:297–334. doi: 10.1007/BF02310555.
    1. Deyo R.A., Diehr P., Patrick D.L. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control. Clin. Trials. 1991;12:S142–S158. doi: 10.1016/S0197-2456(05)80019-4.
    1. Kimberlin C.L., Winterstein A.G. Validity and reliability of measurement instruments used in research. Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm. 2008;65:2276–2284. doi: 10.2146/ajhp070364.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) Guidance for Industry Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims: draft guidance. Health Qual. Life Out. 2006;4:1–20. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-1.
    1. Elkin E.P. Are You in Need of Validation? Psychometric Evaluation of Questionnaires Using SAS®. SAS Glob. Forum. 2012;9:1–9.
    1. Chan Y.H. Biostatistics 104: Correlational analysis. Singapore Med. J. 2003;44:614–619.
    1. Mueller R.O., Hancock G.R. Factor Analysis and Latent Structure, Confirmatory. In: Smelser N.J., Baltes P.B., editors. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Pergamon; Oxford, UK: 2001. pp. 5239–5244.
    1. Fleishman J.A., Selim A.J., Kazis L.E. Deriving SF−12v2 physical and mental health summary scores: A comparison of different scoring algorithms. Qual. Life Res. 2010;19:231–241. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9582-z.
    1. Marsh H.W., Hau K.-T., Wen Z. In Search of Golden Rules: Comment on Hypothesis-Testing Approaches to Setting Cutoff Values for Fit Indexes and Dangers in Overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) Findings. Struct. Equ. Modeling A Multidiscip. J. 2004;11:320–341. doi: 10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2.
    1. Byrne B.M. Structural equation modelling with EQS and EQS/Windows. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. Stat. Soc. 1996;159:343.
    1. Cohen R.J., Swerdlik M.E., Phillips S.M. Psychological Testing and Assessment: An Introduction to Tests and Measurement. 3rd ed. Mayfield Publishing Co; Mountain View, CA, USA: 1996.
    1. Piedmont R.L. Criterion Validity. In: Michalos A.C., editor. Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research. Springer Netherlands; Dordrecht, The Netherlands: 2014. p. 1348.
    1. SAS 9.4 Software. [(accessed on 31 October 2019)]; Available online: .
    1. R: The R Project for Statistical Computing. [(accessed on 21 September 2019)]; Available online:
    1. Nunnally J.C. Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill; New York, USA: 1978.
    1. Koo T.K., Li M.Y. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J. Chiropr. Med. 2016;15:155–163. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012.
    1. Allen M.J., Yen W.M. Introduction to Measurement Theory Book. Brooks/Cole Publishing Company; Monterey, CA, USA: 1979.
    1. Shou J., Ren L., Wang H., Yan F., Cao X., Wang H., Wang Z., Zhu S., Liu Y. Reliability and validity of 12-item Short-Form health survey (SF−12) for the health status of Chinese community elderly population in Xujiahui district of Shanghai. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2016;28:339–346. doi: 10.1007/s40520-015-0401-9.
    1. Jakobsson U., Westergren A., Lindskov S., Hagell P. Construct validity of the SF−12 in three different samples. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 2012;18:560–566. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01623.x.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다