• We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Logo of qualhcLink to Publisher's site
Qual Health Care. Dec 1994; 3(4): 180–185.
PMCID: PMC1055238

SF 36 health survey questionnaire: I. Reliability in two patient based studies.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE--To assess the reliability of the SF 36 health survey questionnaire in two patient populations. DESIGN--Postal questionnaire followed up, if necessary, by two reminders at two week intervals. Retest questionnaires were administered postally at two weeks in the first study and at one week in the second study. SETTING--Outpatient clinics and four training general practices in Grampian region in the north east of Scotland (study 1); a gastroenterology outpatient clinic in Aberdeen Royal Hospitals Trust (study 2). PATIENTS--1787 patients presenting with one of four conditions: low back pain, menorrhagia, suspected peptic ulcer, and varicose veins and identified between March and June 1991 (study 1) and 573 patients attending a gastroenterology clinic in April 1993. MAIN MEASURES--Assessment of internal consistency reliability with Cronbach's alpha coefficient and of test-retest reliability with the Pearson correlation coefficient and confidence interval analysis. RESULTS--In study 1, 1317 of 1746 (75.4%) correctly identified patients entered the study and in study 2, 549 of 573 (95.8%). Both methods of assessing reliability produced similar results for most of the SF 36 scales. The most conservative estimates of reliability gave 95% confidence intervals for an individual patient's score difference ranging from -19 to 19 for the scales measuring physical functioning and general health perceptions, to -65.7 to 65.7 for the scale measuring role limitations attributable to emotional problems. In a controlled clinical trial with sample sizes of 65 patients in each group, statistically significant differences of 20 points can be detected on all eight SF 36 scales. CONCLUSIONS--All eight scales of the SF 36 questionnaire show high reliability when used to monitor health in groups of patients, and at least four scales possess adequate reliability for use in managing individual patients. Further studies are required to test the feasibility of implementing the SF 36 and other outcome measures in routine clinical practice within the health service.

Full text

Full text is available as a scanned copy of the original print version. Get a printable copy (PDF file) of the complete article (1.0M), or click on a page image below to browse page by page. Links to PubMed are also available for Selected References.

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
  • Fitzpatrick R, Ziebland S, Jenkinson C, Mowat A, Mowat A. Importance of sensitivity to change as a criterion for selecting health status measures. Qual Health Care. 1992 Jun;1(2):89–93. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Tarlov AR, Ware JE, Jr, Greenfield S, Nelson EC, Perrin E, Zubkoff M. The Medical Outcomes Study. An application of methods for monitoring the results of medical care. JAMA. 1989 Aug 18;262(7):925–930. [PubMed]
  • Lansky D, Butler JB, Waller FT. Using health status measures in the hospital setting: from acute care to 'outcomes management'. Med Care. 1992 May;30(5 Suppl):MS57–MS73. [PubMed]
  • Lancaster TR, Singer DE, Sheehan MA, Oertel LB, Maraventano SW, Hughes RA, Kistler JP. The impact of long-term warfarin therapy on quality of life. Evidence from a randomized trial. Boston Area Anticoagulation Trial for Atrial Fibrillation Investigators. Arch Intern Med. 1991 Oct;151(10):1944–1949. [PubMed]
  • Dixon J, Welch HG. Priority setting: lessons from Oregon. Lancet. 1991 Apr 13;337(8746):891–894. [PubMed]
  • McHorney CA, Ware JE, Jr, Raczek AE. The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care. 1993 Mar;31(3):247–263. [PubMed]
  • McHorney CA, Ware JE, Jr, Rogers W, Raczek AE, Lu JF. The validity and relative precision of MOS short- and long-form health status scales and Dartmouth COOP charts. Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Med Care. 1992 May;30(5 Suppl):MS253–MS265. [PubMed]
  • Garratt AM, Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Buckingham JK, Russell IT. The SF36 health survey questionnaire: an outcome measure suitable for routine use within the NHS? BMJ. 1993 May 29;306(6890):1440–1444. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Kirshner B, Guyatt G. A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chronic Dis. 1985;38(1):27–36. [PubMed]
  • Kantz ME, Harris WJ, Levitsky K, Ware JE, Jr, Davies AR. Methods for assessing condition-specific and generic functional status outcomes after total knee replacement. Med Care. 1992 May;30(5 Suppl):MS240–MS252. [PubMed]
  • Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NM, O'Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Usherwood T, Westlake L. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ. 1992 Jul 18;305(6846):160–164. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Wright L. Short form 36 (SF36) health survey questionnaire: normative data for adults of working age. BMJ. 1993 May 29;306(6890):1437–1440. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  • Garratt AM, Ruta DA, Abdalla MI, Russell IT. SF 36 health survey questionnaire: II. Responsiveness to changes in health status in four common clinical conditions. Qual Health Care. 1994 Dec;3(4):186–192. [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Articles from Quality in Health Care : QHC are provided here courtesy of BMJ Group

Formats:

Related citations in PubMed

See reviews...See all...

Cited by other articles in PMC

See all...

Links

  • MedGen
    MedGen
    Related information in MedGen
  • PubMed
    PubMed
    PubMed citations for these articles

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...