Quality of life assessment after central corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: comparative evaluation of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey and the World Health Organization Quality of Life–Bref
Authors:
- 1 October 2009
- journal article
- Published by Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group (JNSPG) in Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine
- Vol. 11 (4) , 402-412
Abstract
Object: In this study, the authors assessed the construct validity and the reliability of the World Health Organization Quality of Life–Bref (WHOQOL-Bref) questionnaire in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) and compared the performance of the WHOQOL-Bref and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) in assessing quality of life (QOL) in patients with CSM. Methods: In this prospective study, 70 patients with CSM were assessed preoperatively and again 1 year after central corpectomy using the Nurick scale, the SF-36, and the WHOQOL-Bref. Construct validity and reliability of the WHOQOL-Bref, its responsiveness compared with that of the SF-36, and the correlations between the 2 scales were studied. Results: The WHOQOL-Bref was found to be valid (p < 0.001, Cuzick test for trend between the physical domain of the WHOQOL-Bref and Nurick grade) and reliable (Cronbach α > 0.7). It had smaller floor and ceiling effects (ranges 1.4–7.1% and 0–7.1%, respectively) than the SF-36 (ranges 2.9–71.4% and 0–14.1%, respectively). There was significant postoperative improvement in patient scores on all the SF-36 scales (p < 0.001) and the physical, psychological, and environment domains of the WHOQOL-Bref (p < 0.001). The SF-36 scales were more responsive to change (relative efficiency range 0.24–1) than the WHOQOL-Bref domains (relative efficiency range 0.002–0.73). Among scales measuring similar concepts, only the physical functioning and bodily pain scales of the SF-36 had a moderate correlation (r = 0.57 and 0.53, respectively; p < 0.001) with the physical domain of WHOQOL-Bref. Many of the scales of these 2 QOL instruments unexpectedly had a fair correlation with one another (r range = 0.2–0.4). Conclusions: The WHOQOL-Bref, like the SF-36, is valid and reliable in assessing outcome in patients with CSM. It measures impairment in CSM in a more uniform manner than the SF-36, but its domains are less responsive to postoperative changes. Because the WHOQOL-Bref measures different constructs and has additive value, it should be used along with the SF-36 for QOL assessment in patients with CSM.Keywords
This publication has 52 references indexed in Scilit:
- Patient perceived outcome after central corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathySurgical Neurology, 2007
- Measuring Outcomes in Cervical Spine Surgery: Think Twice Before Using the SF-36Spine, 2006
- Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: 10 years of prospective outcome analysis of anterior decompression and fusionSurgical Neurology, 2005
- Measurement of outcome in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy treated surgicallyBritish Journal Of Neurosurgery, 2002
- SF-36 Health Survey UpdateSpine, 2000
- The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): Position paper from the World Health OrganizationSocial Science & Medicine, 1995
- Surgical treatment for cervical spondylitic myelopathyJournal of Neurosurgery, 1995
- The MOS 36-ltem Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36)Medical Care, 1992
- Natural History and Prognosis of Cervical SpondylosisBMJ, 1963
- CERVICAL MYELOPATHY: A COMPLICATION OF CERVICAL SPONDYLOSISBrain, 1956