The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Content comparison of Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) instruments based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)

Content comparison of Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) instruments based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)
Content comparison of Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) instruments based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF)
The increasing recognition of the patient perspective and, more specifically, functioning and health, has led to an impressive effort in research to develop concepts and instruments to measure them. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) and the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF) represent two different perspectives from which to look at functioning and health. Therefore, it is expected that both will often be used concurrently in clinical practice, research and health reporting. The objective of our study was to examine the relationship between six HRQOL instruments (the SF-36, the NHP, the QL-I, the WHOQOL-BREF, the WHODASII and the EQ-5D) and the ICF. All six HRQOL instruments were linked to the ICF separately by two trained health professionals according to ten linking rules developed specifically for this purpose. The degree of agreement between health professionals was calculated by means of the kappa statistic. Bootstrapped confidence intervals were calculated. In the 148 items of the 6 instruments a total of 226 concepts were identified and linked to the ICF. The estimated kappa coefficients range between 0.82 and 0.98. The concepts contained in the items of the HRQOL instruments were linked to 91 different ICF categories, 17 categories of the component body functions, 60 categories of the component activities and participation, and 14 categories of the component environmental factors. Twelve concepts could not be linked to the ICF at all. In the component body functions, only emotional functions are covered by all examined instruments. In the component activities and participation, all instruments cover aspects of work, but the half of them scarcely cover aspects of mobility. Only four of the six instruments address environmental factors. The ICF proved highly useful for the comparison of HRQOL instruments. The comparison of selected HRQOL instruments may provide clinicians and researchers with new insights when selecting health-status measures for clinical studies.
content validity, generic instruments, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), health status measures, ICF
0962-9343
1225-1237
Cieza, Alarcos
a0df25c5-ee2c-4580-82b3-d0a75591580e
Stucki, Gerold
0534525c-103b-45be-b0a5-061d8867ef0d
Cieza, Alarcos
a0df25c5-ee2c-4580-82b3-d0a75591580e
Stucki, Gerold
0534525c-103b-45be-b0a5-061d8867ef0d

Cieza, Alarcos and Stucki, Gerold (2005) Content comparison of Health Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) instruments based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Quality of Life Research, 14 (5), 1225-1237. (doi:10.1007/s11136-004-4773-0). (PMID:16047499)

Record type: Article

Abstract

The increasing recognition of the patient perspective and, more specifically, functioning and health, has led to an impressive effort in research to develop concepts and instruments to measure them. Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQOL) and the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF) represent two different perspectives from which to look at functioning and health. Therefore, it is expected that both will often be used concurrently in clinical practice, research and health reporting. The objective of our study was to examine the relationship between six HRQOL instruments (the SF-36, the NHP, the QL-I, the WHOQOL-BREF, the WHODASII and the EQ-5D) and the ICF. All six HRQOL instruments were linked to the ICF separately by two trained health professionals according to ten linking rules developed specifically for this purpose. The degree of agreement between health professionals was calculated by means of the kappa statistic. Bootstrapped confidence intervals were calculated. In the 148 items of the 6 instruments a total of 226 concepts were identified and linked to the ICF. The estimated kappa coefficients range between 0.82 and 0.98. The concepts contained in the items of the HRQOL instruments were linked to 91 different ICF categories, 17 categories of the component body functions, 60 categories of the component activities and participation, and 14 categories of the component environmental factors. Twelve concepts could not be linked to the ICF at all. In the component body functions, only emotional functions are covered by all examined instruments. In the component activities and participation, all instruments cover aspects of work, but the half of them scarcely cover aspects of mobility. Only four of the six instruments address environmental factors. The ICF proved highly useful for the comparison of HRQOL instruments. The comparison of selected HRQOL instruments may provide clinicians and researchers with new insights when selecting health-status measures for clinical studies.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: June 2005
Keywords: content validity, generic instruments, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), health status measures, ICF
Organisations: Psychology

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 342036
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/342036
ISSN: 0962-9343
PURE UUID: f5133ef9-544c-4a2b-95aa-3f10cd115ace

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 10 Aug 2012 09:03
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 11:46

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Alarcos Cieza
Author: Gerold Stucki

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×