Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-75dct Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-11T11:32:53.123Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Properties of the 15D and the Nottingham Health Profile questionnaires in patients with lower limb atherosclerotic disease

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2007

Kirsi Koivunen ,
Harri Sintonen  and
Hannele Lukkarinen
Kirsi Koivunen
Affiliation:
University of Oulu
Harri Sintonen
Affiliation:
University of Helsinki
Hannele Lukkarinen
Affiliation:
University of Oulu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the generic health-related quality of life (HRQoL) instruments, the 15D and the Nottingham Health Profile (NHP), in terms of feasibility, cross-sectional construct validity, discriminatory power, and responsiveness to the change in patients with lower limb atherosclerosis disease (LLAD).

Methods: Patients who were treated conservatively (64 patients), scheduled for endovascular treatment (85 patients), or for elective surgery (31 patients) filled in the NHP and the 15D questionnaires before treatment and 12 months after. The methods of analysis included calculations of the completion rate, the multitrait–multimethod matrix, extreme group comparisons with the t-test, and calculations of “floor” and “ceiling” effects and effect sizes.

Results: Both the 15D and the NHP instruments were feasible because full data were obtained at baseline from 84.1 percent of patients and 82 percent at 12 months with the 15D and, respectively, 75.8 percent and 79 percent with the NHP. The multitrait–multimethod matrix and extreme group comparisons provided a clear convergent and discriminant evidence of the cross-sectional construct validity of the instruments. The convergent validity correlations were quite high, ranging between .40 and .682. The tendency for higher percentages at the “ceiling” and “floor” for the NHP suggests that it has less discriminatory power than the 15D on roughly comparable dimensions. The 15D and the NHP were almost equally responsive to change.

Conclusions: This study provided evidence that both the 15D and the NHP are appropriate for measuring HRQoL among patients with LLAD.

Keywords

Psychometric propertiesHealth-related quality of life instrumentsLower limb atherosclerotic disease
Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 23 , Issue 3 , July 2007 , pp. 385 - 391
Copyright
© 2007 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Addington-Hall J, Kalra L., 2003. Who should measure quality of life? In: Carr AJ Higginson J, Robinson PG, eds. Quality of life. London: BMJ Books;
Arfvidsson B, Karlsson J, Dahllof AG, Lundholm K, Sullivan M. 1993 The impact of intermittent claudication on quality of life evaluated by the Sickness Impact Profile technique. Eur J Clin Invest. 23: 741– 745.Google Scholar
Bernard J, Lowy A, Mathys N, et al. 2004 Health related quality of life: A changing construct? Qual Life Res. 13: 1187– 1197.Google Scholar
Bloemenkamp DG, Mali WP, Tanis BC, et al. 2003 Functional health and well-being of relatively young women with peripheral arterial disease is decreased but stable after diagnosis. J Vasc Surg. 38: 104– 110.Google Scholar
Bosch JL, van der Graaf J, Hunink MGM. 1999 Health-related quality of life after angioplasty and stent placement in patients with iliac artery occlusive disease. Circulation. 99: 3155– 3160.Google Scholar
Bosch JL, Hunink MGM. 2000 Comparison of the Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI3) and the EuroQol EQ-5D in patients treated for intermittent claudication. Qual Life Res. 9: 591– 601.Google Scholar
Bosch JL, Halperin EF, Gazelle GS. 2002 Comparison of preference-based utilities of the Short-Form 36 Health Survey and Health Utilities Index before and after treatment of patients with intermittent claudication. Med Desic Making. 22: 403– 409.Google Scholar
Breek JC, de Vries J, van Heck GL, van Berge Henegouwen DP, Hamming JF. 2005 Assessment of disease impact in patients with intermittent claudication: Discrepancy between health status and quality of life. J Vasc Surg. 41: 118– 122.Google Scholar
Cohen J. 1997. Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New York: Academic Press;
deVries SO, Kuipers WD, Hunink MGM. 1998 Intermittent claudication: Symptom severity versus health values. J Vasc Surg. 27: 422– 430.Google Scholar
Diehm C, Kareem S, Lawall H. 2004 Epidemiology of peripheral arterial disease. Vasa. 33: 183– 189.Google Scholar
Dormandy JA, Rutherford RB. 2000 Management of peripheral arterial disease. TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC). J Vasc Surg. 31: S1– S296.Google Scholar
Drummond M. 2001 Introducing economic and quality of life measurements into clinical studies. Ann Med. 5: 344– 349.Google Scholar
Falcoz PE, Chocron S, Mercier M, et al. 2002 Comparison of the Nottingham Health Profile and the 36-Item Health Survey questionnaires in cardiac surgery. Ann Thorac Surg. 73: 1222– 1228.Google Scholar
Goodal S. 2000 Peripheral vascular disease. Nurs Stand. 14: 48– 54.Google Scholar
Haapaniemi TH, Sotaniemi KA, Sintonen H, et al. The generic 15D instrument is valid and feasible for measuring health related quality of life in Parkinson's disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004 75: 976– 983.Google Scholar
Hicken GJ, Lossing AG, Ameli M. 2000 Assessment of generic health-related quality of life in patients with intermittent claudication. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 20: 336– 341.Google Scholar
Holler D, Claes C, von der Schulenburg JM. 2004 Treatment costs and quality of life of patients with peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Vasa. 33: 145– 153.Google Scholar
Hunt SM, McKenna SP, McEven J, et al. 1981 The Nottingham Health Profile: Subjective health status and medical consultations. Soc Sci Med. 15: 221– 229.Google Scholar
Hunt SM, McKenna SP, McEven J. 1989. The Nottingham Health Profile: User's manual. Manchester: Galen Research and Consultancy;
Kazis L, Anderson J, Meenan RF. 1989 Effect size for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care. 27 (Suppl): 110– 127.Google Scholar
Khaira HS, Hanger R, Shearman CP. Quality of life patients with intermittent claudication Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 1996; 11: 65– 69.Google Scholar
Klevsgåard R, Froberg BL, Risberg B, et al. 2002 Nottingham Health Profile and Short-Form 36 Health Survey questionnaires in patients with chronic lower limb ischemia: Before and after revascularization. J Vasc Surg. 36: 310– 317.Google Scholar
Koivukangas P, Ohinmaa A, Koivukangas J. 1995. Nottingham Health Profilen suomalainen versio. (a Finnish version of Nottingham Health Profile). STAKES. Reports 187. Saarijärvi: Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy;
Koivunen K, Lukkarinen H. 2006 Lower limb atherosclerotic disease causes various deteriorations of patients' health-related quality of life. J Vasc Nurs. 24: 102– 115.Google Scholar
Mehta T, Venkata Subramaniam A, Chetter I, et al. 2003 Disease-specific quality of life assessment in intermittent claudication: Review. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 25: 202– 208.Google Scholar
Ohinmaa A. 1997. Indexing health-related quality of life. A comparison of preference-weighted and unweighted indexes. Acta Universitatis Ouluensis G, Oeconomica 1. Oulu: University Press;
Polit FD, Beck CT. 2004. Nursing research. Principles and methods. 7th ed. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott Company;
Sintonen H. 1994. The 15D measure of health-related quality of life: Reliability, validity and sensitivity of its health state descriptive system. Working Paper 41. Melbourne: NCHPE; Available at: http://chpe.buseco.monash.edu.au.
Sintonen H. 2001 The 15D instrument of health-related quality of life: Properties and applications. Ann Med. 33: 328– 336.Google Scholar
Taft C, Karlsson J, Gelin J, et al. 2001 Treatment efficacy of intermittent claudication by invasive therapy, supervised physical exercise training compared to no treatment in unselected randomised patients II: One-year results of health-related quality of life. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 22: 114– 123.Google Scholar
Treat-Jacobson D, Halverson SL, Ratchford A, et al. A patient-derived perspective of health- related quality of life with peripheral arterial disease. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2002; 34: 55– 60.Google Scholar
Wann-Hansson C, Hallberg IR, Risberg B, Klevsgård R. 2004 A comparison of the Nottingham Health Profile and Short Form 36 Health Survey in patients with chronic lower limb ischaemia in a longitudinal perspective. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2: 9.Google Scholar
Wann-Hansson C, Hallberg IR, Risberg B, Lundell A, Klevsgard R. 2005 Health-related quality of life after revascularization for peripheral arterial occlusive disease: Long-term follow-up. J Adv Nurs. 51: 227– 235.Google Scholar
Weitz J, Byrne J, Clagett GP, et al. 1996 AHA scientific statement: Diagnosis and treatment chronic arterial insufficiency of the lower extremities: A critical review. Circulation. 94: 3026– 3049.Google Scholar
WHOQOL Group. Annotated bibliography of the WHO Quality of Life Assessment Instrument–WHOQOL. Rev. 2. World Health Organization. Switzerland: Department of Mental Health; 1998 (October 1999 version). Available at: http://depts.washington.edu/yqol/docs/WHOQOL_Bibliography.pdf.