A comparison of test-retest reliability of self-reported SF-36, WHOQOL, and EQ-5D questionnaires based on different administration approaches
Date Issued
2009
Date
2009
Author(s)
Lin, Yu-Jen
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This aim of this study is to examine whether, and to what extent the test-retest reliability of Short-Form-36 (SF-36), World Health Organization Quality of Life (WHOQOL-BREF), and EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) questionnaires are affected by the administration approaches in patients with chronic liver disease.ETHODS: Patients with chronic liver disease were recruited from the outpatient department of a medical center in Taiwan. Their self-reported questionnaires were collected by two approaches. The first approach is that patients received an interview and filled the questionnaire in hospital. Retest questionnaires were returned by mail two weeks later. The other approach is that patients filled both test and retest questionnaires at home, under researcher’s instruction, during the two-week period. Of 69 patients recruited for the first approach; 52 persons completed both questionnaires (75.4%), while the response rate of the second approach is 70.6% (127 of 180). The response rate in the second approach was better (two mail surveys) than that in the first approach (interview at the out patient clinics followed by mail).fter scoring questionnaires, a paired-t test and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) were conducted to compare test-retest reliability for three questionnaires. The difference of mean score between two approaches was examined by independent t test. Analyses of mean score differences of different domains were performed by multiple linear regressions with different administration methods, age, gender, and education as covariates.ESULTS: The test-retest reliabilities ranged from 0.37 to 0.81 in the first approach, while they ranged 0.61-0.87 in the 2nd approach. Most ICCs were higher in the 2nd approach than the 1st approach. There was also no significant difference in the mean difference of test-retest results in two approaches, except in the dimension of ‘pain/discomfort’ mean difference (0.1±0.4 and 0.0 ± 0.3, p=0.04) by EQ-5D but the result were not found by multiple linear regression, after controlling variables of age, sex, and education (p=0.06). Among the three questionnaires, the large ceiling effect (75.0%-100.0%) and the high mean score for utility (0.95±0.08) of the EQ-5D suggest it could be less responsive to detect any difference when the severity of illness is low. In contrast, the scores of WHOQOL-BREF have wider ranges, less ceiling effect （1.9%） and no floor effect.ONCLUSIONS: The high reliabilities of the present study supported that mail survey method is acceptable for measuring quality of life, and the WHOQOL-BREF and the SF-36 questionnaires of instrument could be used for assessing HRQoL in patients with asymptotic carrier.
Subjects
interviewer''s effect
Quality of life
mode of administration
Type
thesis
File(s)![Thumbnail Image]()
Loading...
Name
ntu-98-R95841019-1.pdf
Size
23.32 KB
Format
Adobe PDF
Checksum
(MD5):91aaea8c72d86b656654cebe323513b6