Osteoporosis International

, Volume 17, Issue 9, pp 1435–1442 | Cite as

Relationships between SF-36 health profile and bone mineral density: the Hertfordshire Cohort Study

  • E. M. DennisonEmail author
  • H. E. Syddall
  • C. Statham
  • A. Aihie Sayer
  • C. Cooper
Original Article


We utilised the Hertfordshire Cohort Study (HCS) to relate bone mineral density (BMD) to SF-36 health-related quality of life scores. We studied 737 men and 675 women who had completed a home interview and clinic. Four hundred and ninety-eight men and 468 women subsequently attended for bone densitometry [dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA)]. SF-36 questionnaire responses were mapped to eight domains: physical function (PF), role physical (RP), role emotional (RE), social functioning (SF), mental health (MH), vitality (VT), bodily pain (BP) and general health perception (GH). Subjects with scores in the lowest gender-specific fifth of the distribution were classified as having “poor” status for each domain. Odds ratios (OR) for poor status for each domain were calculated per unit increase in lumbar spine or total femoral BMD t score. Among men after adjustment for age, BMI, social class, lifestyle (including physical activity) and known comorbidity, higher total femoral t score was associated with decreased prevalence of poor SF-36 scores for PF [OR 0.72 (95%CI 0.53, 0.97), p=0.03], SF [OR 0.70 (95%CI 0.53, 0.94), p=0.02] or GH domains [OR 0.74 (95%CI 0.56, 0.99), p=0.05], but no relationships were apparent between SF-36 scores and lumbar spine t score. Among women, the adjusted relationship between higher total femoral t score and decreased prevalence of poor PF was consistent [OR 0.71 (95%CI 0.50, 1.00), p=0.05], but no other relationships were significant. Poorer functioning (assessed by SF-36 questionnaire) is associated with lower total femoral BMD in older men (but less so in women) after adjustment for lifestyle factors and comorbidity.


Bone Cohort Osteoporosis Quality of life SF-36 



We thank the men and women who participated in the study, the general practitioners who allowed access to their patients, and the nurses and radiology staff who administered the BMD measurements. Computing support was provided by Vanessa Cox.

Funding: This study was supported by grants from the Medical Research Council and Arthritis Rheumatism Campaign.


  1. 1.
    Hallberg I, Rosenqvist AM, Kartous L, Lofman O, Wahlstrom O, Toss G (2004) Health-related quality of life after osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporosis Int 15:834–841CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cockerill W, Lunt M, Silman AJ, Cooper C, Lips P, Bhalla AK, Cannata JB, Eastell R, Felsenberg D, Gennari C, Johnell O, Kanis JA, Kiss C, Masaryk P, Naves M, Poor G, Raspe H, Reid DM, Reeve J, Stepan J, Todd C, Woolf AD, O’Neill TW (2004) Health-related quality of life and radiographic vertebral fracture. Osteoporosis Int 15:113–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adachi JD, Ioannidis G, Pickard L, Berger C, Prior JC, Joseph L, Hanley DA, Olszynski WP, Murray TM, Anastassiades T, Hopman W, Brown JP, Kirkland S, Joyce C, Papaioannou A, Poliquin S, Tenenhouse A, Papadimitropoulos EA (2003) The association between osteoporotic fractures and health-related quality of life as measured by the Health Utilities Index in the Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study. Osteoporosis Int 14:895–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Oleksik A, Lips P, Dawson A, Minshall ME, Shen W, Cooper C, Kanis J (2000) Health-related quality of life in postmenopausal women with low BMD with or without prevalent vertebral fractures. J Bone Miner Res 15:1384–1392PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Silverman SL, Minshall ME, Shen W, Harper KD, Xie S (2001) The relationship of health-related quality of life to prevalent and incident vertebral fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis: results from the Multiple Outcomes of Raloxifene Evaluation Study. Arthritis Rheum 44:2611–2619CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yoh K, Tanaka K, Ishikawa A, Ishibashi T, Uchino Y, Sato Y, Tobinaga M, Hasegawa N, Kamae S, Yoshizawa M (2005) Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in Japanese osteoporotic patients and its improvement by elcatonin treatment. J Bone Miner Metab 23:167–173CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dhillon V, Hurst N, Hannan J (2005) Association of low general health status, measured prospectively by Euroqol EQ5D, with osteoporosis, independent of a history of prior fracture. Osteoporosis Int 16:483–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Picavet HSJ, Hoeymans N (2004) Health related quality of life in multiple musculoskeletal diseases: SF-36 and EQ-5D in the DMC3 study. Ann Rheum Dis 63:723–729CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Martin AR, Sornay-Rendu E, Chandler JM, Duboeuf F, Girman CJ, Delmas PD (2002) The impact of osteoporosis on quality-of-life: the OFELY cohort. Bone 31:32–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Romagnoli E, Carnevale V, Nofroni I, D’Erasmo E, Paglia F, De Geronimo S, Pepe J, Raejntroph N, Maranghi M, Minisola S (2004)Quality of life in ambulatory postmenopausal women: the impact of reduced bone mineral density and subclinical vertebral fractures. Osteoporosis Int 15:975–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Badia X, Prieto L, Roset M, Diez-Perez A, Herdman M (2002) Development of a short osteoporosis quality of life questionnaire by equating items from two existing instruments. J Clin Epidemiol 55:32–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ware JE, Kosinski M, Gandek B, Aaronsen NK, Apolone G, Bech P, Brazier J, Bullinger M, Kaasa S, Leplege A, Prieto L, Sullivan M (1998) The factor structure of the SF-36 Health Survey in 10 countries: results from the IQOLA project. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1159–1165CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sydall HE, Aihie Sayer A, Dennison EM, Martin HJ, Barker DJP, Cooper C (2005) Cohort profile: The Hertfordshire Cohort Study. International Journal of Epidemiology 34:1234–1242CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dallosso HM, Morgan K, Bassy EJ, Ebrahim SBJ, Fentem PH, Arie THD (1988) Levels of customary physical activity among the old and very old living at home. J Epidemiol Commun Health 42:121–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Prineas RJ, Crow RS, Blackburn H (1982) The Minnesota code manual of elecrocardiographic findings: standards and procedures for measurement and classification. John Wright, BostonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Definition, diagnosis and classification of diabetes mellitus and its complications. Report of a WHO consultation, Part I: Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus, Geneva 1999Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ware JE, Kosinski M, Gandek B (2000) SF-36 health survey: manual and interpretation guide. Quality Metric Incorporated, Lincoln, RIGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dennison EM, Syddall HE, Aihie Sayer A, Craighead S, Phillips DIW, Cooper C (2004) Type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with increased axial bone density in men and women from the Hertfordshire Cohort Study: evidence for an indirect effect of insulin resistance? Diabetologia 47:1968CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Egger P, Duggleby S, Hobbs R, Fall C, Cooper C (1996) Cigarette smoking and bone mineral density in the elderly. J Epidemiol Commun Health 50:47–50Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sogaard AJ, Meyer HE, Falch J (2003) The Oslo Health Study: to get the diagnosis osteoporosis- consequence on self-reported health. Osteoporosis Int 14 (Suppl 2):S20Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kessenich CR, Guyatt GH, Rosen CJ (1998) Health-related quality of life and participation in osteoporosis clinical trials. Calcif Tissue Int 62:189–192CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Osteoporosis Foundation and National Osteoporosis Foundation 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. M. Dennison
    • 1
    Email author
  • H. E. Syddall
    • 1
  • C. Statham
    • 1
  • A. Aihie Sayer
    • 1
  • C. Cooper
    • 1
  1. 1.MRC Epidemiology Resource CentreUniversity of Southampton, Southampton General HospitalSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations