Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The paradox of self-rated health following joint replacement surgery

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Self-rated health is a commonly used patient-reported outcome, but its responsiveness to is not well documented. We examined the ability of self-rated health to capture health changes attributable to a highly effective surgical intervention.

Methods

Prospective study of patients with severe osteoarthritis of the hip (N = 990) or knee (N = 907) who underwent total hip replacement (THA) or total knee replacement (TKA). Self-rated health was assessed pre-operatively and 1 year after surgery on a scale between “excellent” and “poor,” along with other health items (other 11 items of the SF12 questionnaire) and multi-item Pain and Function scales.

Results

On average, self-rated health was unchanged by surgery. In both THA and TKA cohorts, of 10 patients, 6 rated their health the same after surgery as before, 2 gave a higher rating, and 2 gave a lower rating. In contrast, major improvements were observed for all other SF12 items, and for the Pain and Function scales, in both cohorts of patients. Nevertheless, both before and after surgery, self-rated health was associated with the other SF12 items and with Pain and Function scores. These associations were stronger after surgery than before.

Conclusions

Self-rated health was not responsive to major improvements in health, documented by other instruments, attributable to joint replacement surgery. However, self-rated health was even more strongly associated with concurrent assessments of more specific health problems after surgery than before. Caution is advised in interpreting changes in self-rated health following health-altering interventions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jylhä, M. (2009). What is self-rated health and why does it predict mortality? Towards a unified conceptual model. Social Science & Medicine, 69, 307–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Fayers, P. M., & Sprangers, M. A. G. (2002). Understanding self-rated health. Lancet, 359, 187–188.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Garbarski, D. (2016). Research in and prospects for the measurement of health using self-rated health. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80, 977–997.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. DeSalvo, K. B., Bloser, N., Reynolds, K., He, J., & Muntner, P. (2005). Mortality prediction with a single general sefl-rated health question: A meta-analysis. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21, 267–275.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lima-Costa, F. M., Cesar, C. C., Chor, D., & Proietti, F. A. (2012). Self-rated health compared with objectively measured health status as a tool for mortality risk screening in older adults: 10-year follow-up of the Bambui Cohort Study on Aging. American Journal of Epidemiology, 175, 228–235.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. DeSalvo, K. B., Fan, V. S., McDonnell, M. B., et al. (2005). Predicting mortality and healthcare utilization with a single question. Health Services Research, 40, 1233–1246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. DeSalvo, K. B., Jones, T. M., Peabody, J., et al. (2009). Health care expenditure prediction with a single item, self-rated health measure. Medical Care, 47, 440–447.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Latham, K., & Peek, C. W. (2013). Self-rated health and morbidity onset among late midlife US adults. The Journals of Gerontology, 68, 107–116.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Perneger, T. V., Gayet-Ageron, A., Courvoisier, D. S., Agoritsas, T., & Cullati, S. (2013). Self-rated health: Analysis of distances and transitions between response options. Quality of Life Research, 22, 2761–2768.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Meng, X., & D’Arcy, C. (2016). Determinants of self-rated health among Canadian seniors over time: A longitudinal population-based study. Social Indicators Research, 126, 1343–1353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bailis, D. S., Segall, A., & Chipperfield, J. G. (2003). Two views of self-rated general health status. Social Science & Medicine, 56, 203–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lübbeke, A., Garavaglia, G., Barea, C., & Hoffmeyer, P. Why do we need hospital-based registries? The Geneva Hip Arthroplasty Registry. EFORT publication 2010. Accessed February 26, 2018, from http://www.rpa.spot.pt/getdoc/0071e52c-7cdf-4d4e-86f7-5266c8b15bfb/The-Geneva-Hip-Arthroplasty-Registry_E-BOOK_Table-.aspx.

  13. Gandek, B., Ware, J. E., Aaronson, N. K., et al. (1998). Cross-validation of item selection and scoring for the SF-12 Health Survey in nine countries: Results from the IQOLA Project. International quality of life assessment. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 1171–1178.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Leplège, A., Ecosse, E., Verdier, A., & Perneger, T. V. (1998). The French SF-36 Health Survey: Translation, cultural adaptation, and preliminary psychometric evaluation. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 1013–1023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Whitehouse, S. L., Lingard, E. A., Katz, J. N., & Learmonth, I. D. (2003). Development and testing of a reduced WOMAC function scale. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British), 85, 706–711.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Zahiri, C. A., Schmalzried, T. P., Szuszczewicz, E. S., & Amstutz, H. C. (1998). Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. The Journal of Arthroplasty, 13, 890–895.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Perruccio, A. V., Davis, A. M., Hogg-Johnson, S., & Badley, E. M. (2011). Importance of self-rated health and mental well-being in predicting health outcomes following total joingt replacement surgery for osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care & Research, 63:973–981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sprangers, M. A., & Schwartz, C. E. (1999). Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: A theoretical model. Social Science & Medicine, 48, 1507–1515.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Barclay-Goddard, R., Epstein, J. D., & Mayo, N. E. (2009). Response shift: A brief overview and proposed research priorities. Quality of Life Research, 18, 335–348.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ubel, P. A., Peeters, Y., & Smith, D. (2010). Abandoning the language of “response shift”: A plea for conceptual clarity in distinguishing scale recalibration from true changes in quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 19, 465–471.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Razmjou, H., Yee, A., Ford, M., & Finkelstein, J. A. (2006). Response shift in outcome assessment in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty. JBJS, 88, 2590–2595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zajacova, A., & Dowd, J. B. (2011). Reliability of self-rated health in US adults. American Journal of Epidemiology, 174, 977–983.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Garbarski, D., Dykema, J., Croes, K. D., & Edwards, D. F. (2017). How participants report their health status: cognitive interviews of self-rated health across race/ethnicity, gender, age, and educational attainment. BMC Public Health, 17, 771.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The Geneva Arthroplasty Registry is supported in part by the Fondation pour la Recherche Ostéo-Articulaire.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Geneva University Hospitals, 4 rue Gabrielle-Perret-Gentil, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland

    Thomas Perneger

  2. University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland

    Thomas Perneger & Anne Lübbeke

  3. Division of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland

    Anne Lübbeke

Authors
  1. Thomas Perneger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anne Lübbeke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Perneger.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Perneger, T., Lübbeke, A. The paradox of self-rated health following joint replacement surgery. Qual Life Res 28, 503–508 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-2018-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-2018-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation