Quality of Life Research

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 165–173 | Cite as

Comparison of German language versions of the QWB-SA and SF-36 evaluating outcomes for patients with prostate disease

  • D. Frosch
  • F. Porzsolt
  • R. Heicappell
  • K. Kleinschmidt
  • M. Schatz
  • S. Weinknecht
  • R. M. Kaplan
Article

Abstract

Background: The quality of well-being scale (QWB) and the Medical Outcome Study 36-item short form (SF-36) are alternative methods for measuring general health outcomes. Few studies compare these approaches against one another and no studies have compared German language versions. Method: A German language version of the self-administered quality of well-being scale (QWB-SA) was developed using forward and back translation methods. The German QWB-SA and a German language version of the SF-36 were administered to clinical population groups with current diagnoses of prostate cancer, benign hyperplasia of the prostate, colon cancer, and rectal cancer. Data were obtained from four German clinics. In addition to the quality of life measures, data on cancer stage and disease state were obtained. Results: The QWB-SA and SF-36 were highly correlated. The QWB-SA was systematically related to disease state. Those with no symptomatic evidence had the highest scores followed by those who were stable with no metastatic disease and those with metastatic progression. Similar patterns were found for most SF-36 scales although the SF-36 failed to discriminate between those with no evidence of disease and those with stable disease without metastasis. Conclusions: Both the QWB-SA and SF-36 perform as expected using German language translations. Although both measures differentiate patients with metastasis from those without symptoms, the QWB-SA better differentiated those with no evidence of disease from those with stable disease without metastasis.

Prostate cancer Quality of life Quality of well-being scale SF-36 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cramer JA, Spilker B. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics: An introduction, Vol. xiv, Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1998; 274.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Spilker B. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. 2nd edn., Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996; 1259.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kaplan RM, Ganiats TG, Sieber WJ, Anderson JP. The quality of well-being scale: Critical similarities and differences with SF-36. Int J Qual Health Care 1998; 10: 509-520.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaplan RM, Patterson TL, Kerner DN, Atkinson JH, Heaton RK, Grant I. The quality of well-being scale in asymptomatic HIV-infected patients. HNRC Group. HIV Neural Behavioral Research Center. Qual Life Res 1997; 6: 507-514.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ware JE Jr, Kosinski M, Bayliss MS, McHorney CA, Rogers WH, Raczek A. Comparison of methods for the scoring and statistical analysis of SF-36 health profile and summary measures: Summary of results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Med Care 1995; 33: AS264-AS279.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Keller SD, Ware JE Jr, Gandek B, et al. Testing the equivalence of translations of widely used response choice labels: Results from the IQOLA Project. Int Qual Life Assess, J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 933-944.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bullinger M, Alonso J, Apolone G, et al. Translating health status questionnaires and evaluating their quality: The IQOLA Project approach. Int Qual Life Assess, J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 913-923.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaplan RM, Sieber WJ, Ganiats TG. The quality of well-being scale: Comparison of the interviewer-administered version with a self-administered questionnaire. Psychol Health 1997; 12: 783-791.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kaplan RM. Application of a general health policy model in the American health care crisis. J Royal Soc Med 1993; 86: 277-281.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kaplan RM. Value judgment in the Oregon Medicaid experiment. Med Care 1994; 32: 975-988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kaplan RM, Anderson JP, Patterson TL, et al. Validity of the quality of well-being scale for persons with human immunodeficiency virus infection. HNRC Group. HIV Neurobehavioral Research Center. Psychosom Med 1995; 57: 138-147.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Berry CC. Health status: Types of validity and the index of well-being. Health Services Res 1976; 11: 478-507.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaplan RM, Bush JW, Berry CC. Health status index: Category rating versus magnitude estimation for measuring levels of well-being. Med Care 1979; 17: 501-525.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kaplan R, Bush J, Berry CC. The reliability, stability, and generalizability of a health status index. American Statistical Association, Proceedings of the Social Status Section. 1988; 704-709.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Balaban DJ, Sagi PC, Goldfarb NI, Nettler S. Weights for scoring the quality of well-being instrument among rheumatoid arthritics: A comparison to general population weights. Med Care 1986; 24: 973-980.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Andresen EM, Rothenberg BM, Kaplan RM. Performance of a self-administered mailed version of the quality of well-being (QWB-SA) questionnaire among older adults. Med Care 1998; 36: 1349-1360.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ware JE Jr, Gandek B. Overview of the SF-36 Health Survey and the International quality of life assessment (IQOLA) Project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 903-912.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 1993; 46: 1417-1432.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bullinger M. German translation and psychometric testing of the SF-36 Health Survey: Preliminary results from the IQOLA Project. Int Qual Life Assess, Social Sci Med 1995; 41: 1359-1366.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bombardier L, Ware J, Russell IJ, Larson M, Chalmers A, Read JL. Auranofin therapy and quality of life in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: Results of a multicenter trial. Am J Med 1986; 81: 565-578.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gold M. Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kaplan RM, Anderson JP. The General Health Policy Model: An integrated approach. In Spilker B (ed.), Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996: 309-322.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    DeBon M, Pace P, Kozin F, Kaplan RM. Validation of self-reported dysfunction in older adults. J Clin Geropsychol 1995; 1: 283-292.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • D. Frosch
    • 1
    • 2
  • F. Porzsolt
    • 3
  • R. Heicappell
    • 4
  • K. Kleinschmidt
    • 5
  • M. Schatz
    • 6
  • S. Weinknecht
    • 7
  • R. M. Kaplan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Family and Preventive MedicineUniversity of CaliforniaSan DiegoUSA
  2. 2.SDSU/UCSD Joint Doctoral Program in Clinical PsychologyGermany
  3. 3.Psychotherapie und Psychosomatische MedizinUniversität UlmGermany
  4. 4.Department of UrologyBenjamin Franklin UniversityGermany
  5. 5.Department of UrologyUniversity Hospital UlmGermany
  6. 6.Department of General SurgeryUniversity Hospital UlmGermany
  7. 7.Department of UrologyUrban HospitalBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations