Using the 12-item Short Form health survey (SF-12) to measure quality of life among older people
- 548 Downloads
Aims: To present descriptive data, study psychometric abilities, and investigate the characteristics of non-respondents to SF-12. Method: The study had a randomized sample (n=4278; age: 75–105) stratified in four age groups. Factor analyses were performed to investigate the factor structure of the instrument, and convergent and discriminant validity was assessed by correlation between summary scores and by means of various measures (such as symptoms and ADL). Mean scores and Cronbach’s alpha were computed for the total sample and for each stratum. Respondents and non-respondents to SF-12 were compared regarding various measures. A multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify determinants for respondents/non-respondents. Results: Mean scores in the total sample were 37.5 SD 11.9 for the physical component summary score (PCS) and 50.3 SD 11.5 for the mental component summary score (MCS). Both PCS and MCS decreased significantly with higher age. The instrument showed acceptable convergent/discriminant validity and Cronbach’s alpha, but the factor solution did not follow the intended structure of the instrument. Completion rate for all 12 items was 85.5% in the total sample, and the characteristics of non-respondents to SF-12 were higher age, being female, living alone, living in special accommodation, being worried about health, being in need of help with activities of daily living, reporting fewer symptoms, and having a smaller social network than respondents. Conclusions: The instrument generally showed acceptable validity and reliability, except for its factor structure. Furthermore, new determinants for non-respondents of SF-12 were found, such as type of living conditions, being worried about health, and social network.
KeywordsAged older people quality of life SF-12
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Ware JE, Sherboume CD. The MOS 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30: 473–81.Google Scholar
- 3.Ware JE, Gandek B, Aaronson N, et al. Testing the SF-12 summary health measures in nine countries: results from the IQOLA project. [Abstracts: 4th Annual Conference of ISOQOL] Qual Life Res 1997; 6: 739.Google Scholar
- 8.Resnick B, Nahm ES. Reliability and validity testing of the revised 12-item Short-Form health survey in older adults. J Nurs Measure 2001; 9: 151–61.Google Scholar
- 17.Tibblin G, Svärdsudd K, Welin L, Erikson H, Larsson B. Quality of life as an outcome variable and a risk factor for mortality and cardiovascular disease: a study of men born in 1913. J Hypertension 1993; Suppl 4: S81-6.Google Scholar
- 18.Sullivan M, Karlsson J, Taft C. SF-12 Hälsoenkät. Svensk manual. [SF-12 Swedish manual]. Göteborg: Göteborg University. 1997.Google Scholar
- 19.Bland JM. Altman DG. Multiple significance tests: the Bonferroni method. BMJ 1995; 310: 170.Google Scholar
- 21.Nunnally JC. Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Inc., 1994.Google Scholar
- 22.Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales. A practical guide to their development and use. (2nd ed.) Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.Google Scholar
- 23.Fayers PM, Machin D. Quality of life. Assessment, analysis and interpretation. West Sussex, England: Wiley, 2000.Google Scholar
- 25.Sherboume CD, Meredith LS. Quality of self-reported data: a comparison of older and younger chronically ill patients. J Gerontol Soc Sci 1992; 47:S204-11.Google Scholar