Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Single-factor scoring validation for the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) in patients with systemic sclerosis and comparison with early rheumatoid arthritis patients

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

Abstract

Objective

Structural validity for the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) has recently been provided for patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). The goal of the current study was to examine the structural validity of the HAQ-DI in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc, scleroderma) and to compare its performance with that in patients with RA.

Methods

The HAQ-DI structural validity was first assessed in a sample of 100 scleroderma patients using confirmatory factor analysis. Second, the similarity of factor structures between SSc patients (n = 291) and RA patients (n = 278) was tested using a multigroup structural validity model to assure that comparison of scores between these two diagnostic groups is appropriate.

Results

Results yielded a single-factor HAQ-DI score which favored the current scoring system of the HAQ-DI (model fit was CFI = 0.99 and RMSEA = 0.04). Moreover, even the most stringent model of multigroup structural validity affirmed the similarity between SSc and RA patients on the HAQ-DI (model fit was CFI = 0.99 and RMSEA = 0.04) nor was it different from a model without any demands on group similarity: CFI difference = 0.007; χ2 = 4.29, df = 26, p=0.99.

Conclusion

The current results indicate that a single-factor HAQ-DI is appropriate for future clinical trials in scleroderma and, in addition, HAQ-DI scores among patients with SSc and early RA can be compared legitimately with one another.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Medsger Jr TA (1997) System sclerosis: Clinical aspects. In: Koopman W (eds) Arthritis and Allied Conditions. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 1433–1464

    Google Scholar 

  2. Fries JF, Spitz P, Kraines RG, Holman HR (1980) Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 23:137–145

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Cole JC, Motivala SJ, Khanna D, Lee JY, Paulus HE, Irwin MR (2005) Validation of a single-factor structure and the scoring protocol for the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI). Arthritis Care Res 53:536–542

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Khanna D, Clements PJ, Furst DE, Chon Y, Elashoff R, Roth MD (2005) Correlation of the degree of dyspnea with health-related quality of life, functional abilities, and diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide in patients with system sclerosis and active alveolitis: Results from the Scleroderma Lung Study. Arthritis Rheum 52:592–600

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Khanna D, Furst DE, Clements PJ, Park GS, Hays RD, Yoon J, et al. (2005) Responsiveness of the SF-36 and the Health Assessment Questionnaire Disability Index in a systemic sclerosis clinical trial. J Rheumatol 32:832–840

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Clements PJ, Wong WK, Hurwitz EL, Furst DE, Mayes MD, White B, et al (2001) The disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire is a predictor and correlate of outcome in the high-dose versus low-dose penicillamine in system sclerosis trial. Arthritis Rheum 44:653–661

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Messick S (1995) Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. Am Psychol 50:741–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Haynes SN, Richard DCS, Kubany ES (1995) Content validity in psychological assessment: A functional approach to concepts and methods. Psychol Assess 7:238–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Vandenberg RJ, Lance CE (2000) A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organ Res Method 3:4–70

    Google Scholar 

  10. Meade AW, Lautenschlager GJ (2004) A comparison of item response theory and confirmatory factor analytic methodologies for establishing measurement equivalence/invariance. Organ Res Method 7:361–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Seibold JR, Clements PJ, Korn JH, Ellman M, Rothfield N, Wigley FM, et al (2001) US phase III trial of relaxin in diffuse scleroderma [Abstract]. J Rheumatol 63S:T-64

    Google Scholar 

  12. Preliminary criteria for the classification of systemic sclerosis (scleroderma). Subcommittee for scleroderma criteria of the American Rheumatism Association Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee. J Rheumatol 1980; 23: 581–590

    Google Scholar 

  13. Clements PJ, Hurwitz EL, Wong WK, Seibold JR, Mayes MD, White B, et al (2000) Skin thickness score as a predictor and correlate of outcome in systemic sclerosis: High-dose versus low-dose penicillamine trial. Arthritis Rheum 43:2445–2454

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Tashkin DP, Elashoff D, Clements PJ, Golding JM, Roth MD et al. Cyclophosphamide versus placebo in scleroderma lung disease. New Engl J Med (in press)

  15. Khanna D, Ranganath VK, Fitzgerald J, Park GS, Altman RD, Elashoff D, et al (2005) Increased radiographic damage scores at the onset of seropositive rheumatoid arthritis in older patients are associated with osteoarthritis of the hands but not with more rapid progression of damage. Arthritis Rheum 52:2284–2292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wu H, Khanna D, Park GS, Gersuk V, Nepom GT, Wong WK, et al (2004) Interaction between RANKL and HLA-DRB1 genotypes may contribute to younger age at onset of seropositive rheumatoid arthritis in an inception cohort. Arthritis Rheum 50:3093–3103

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Clements PJ, Wong WK, Hurwitz EL, Furst DE, Mayes MD, White B, et al (1999) Correlates of the disability index of the Health Assessment Questionnaire: A measure of functional impairment in systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum 42:2372–2380

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Khanna D, Furst DE, Clements PJ, Park GS, Hays RD, Seibold JR (2003) Responsiveness of the health related quality of life instruments (sf-36 and HAQ-DI) in a systemic sclerosis clinical trial [Abstract]. Arthritis Rheum 48:S398

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kumar A, Malaviya AN, Pandhi A, Singh R (2002) Validation of an Indian of the Health Assessment Questionnaire in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 41:1457–1459

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. El Meidany YM, El Gaafary MM, Ahmed I (2003) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of an Arabic Health Assessment Questionnaire for use in rheumatoid patients. Joint Bone Spine 70:195–202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. El Meidany YM, Youssef S, El Gaafary MM, Ahmed I (2003) Evaluating changes in health status: sensitivity to change of the modified Arabic Health Assessment Questionnaire in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Joint Bone Spine 70:509–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bathon JM, Martin RW, Fleischmann RM, Tesser JR, Schiff MH, Keystone EC, et al (2000) A comparison of etanercept and methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis. New Engl J Med 343:1586–1593

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Lipsky PE, van der Heijde DM, St. Clair EW, Smolen JS, Furst JS, Kalden JR, et al (2000) 102-week clinical and radiologic results from the ATTRACT trial: A 2-year, randomized, controlled, phase 3 trial of infliximab in patients with active RA despite MTX. Arthritis Rheum 43:S269

    Google Scholar 

  24. Weinblatt ME, Keystone EC, Furst DE, Moreland LW, Weisman MH, Birbara CA, et al (2003) Adalimumab, a fully human anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha monoclonal antibody, for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis in patient taking concomitant methotrexate: The ARMADA trial. Arthritis Rheum 48:35–45

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Wolfe F, Hawley DJ (1998) The long term outcomes of rheumatoid arthritis: Work disability: A prospective 18 year study of 823 patients. J Rheumatol 25:2108–2117

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Wolfe F (2002) The determination and measurement of functional disability in rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Res 4:S11–S15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Wolfe F, Michaud K, Gefeller O, Choi HK (2003) Predicting mortality in patient with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 48:1530–1542

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bruce B, Fries JF (2003) The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire: Dimensions and practical applications. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Westhovens R, Cole JC, Li T, Martin M, MacLean R, Lin␣P et al. Improved health-related quality of life for rheumatoid arthritis patients treated with abatacept who have inadequate response to anti-TNF therapy in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter randomized clinical trial. Rheumatology (in press)

  30. MacCallum RC, Browne MW, Sugawara HM (1996) Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance modeling. Psychol Method 1:130–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Arbuckle JL. Amos. In. 6.0 ed. Chicago: Small Waters, 2005

  32. Cole JC, Motivala SJ, Dang J, Lucko A, Lang N, Levin MJ, et al (2004) Structural validation of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 26:241–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Cole JC, Rabin AS, Smith TL, Kaufman AS (2004) Development and validation of a Rasch-derived CES-D short form. Psychol Assess 16:360–372

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Nevitt J, Hancock GR (2000) Improving the root mean square error of approximation for nonnormal conditions in structural equation modeling. J Exp Educ 68:251–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Bollen K, Stine RA (1992) Bootstrapping goodness-of-fit measures in structural equation models. Sociol Method Res 21:205–229

    Google Scholar 

  36. Finney SJ, DiStefano C (2006) Nonnormal and categorical data in structural equation modeling. In: Hancock GR, Mueller RO, (eds). Structural Equation Modeling: A Second Course. IAP, Greenwich, CT, pp 269–314

    Google Scholar 

  37. Nevitt J, Hancock GR (2004) Evaluating small sample approaches for model test statistics in structural equation modeling. Multivar Behav Res 39:439–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Schumacker RE, Lomax RG (1996) A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  39. Marsh HW, Hau K-T, Wen Z (2004) In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Struct Equation Model 11:320–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Bentler PM, Bonett DG. Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull 1980; 88: 588–606

    Google Scholar 

  41. Hu L-t, Bentler PM (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equation Model 6:1–55

    Google Scholar 

  42. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB (2002) Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct Equation Model 9:223–255

    Google Scholar 

  43. Arbuckle JL, Wothke W. Amos 4.0 User’s Guide, 4.01 ed. Chicago: Small Waters, 1999

  44. Cohen J (1988) Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  45. Palmer RF, Graham JW, Taylor B, Tatterson J (2002) Construct validity in health behavior research: Interpreting latent variable models involving self-report and objective measures. J Behav Med 25:525–550

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Anastasi A, Urbina S (1998) Psychological Testing. 7th ed. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  47. Hershberger SL (2006) The problem of equivalent structural models. In: Hancock GR, Mueller RO (eds) Structural Equation Modeling: A Second Course. IAP, Greenwich, CT, pp 13–42

    Google Scholar 

  48. Muthén BO, Muthén LK (2004) Mplus 3.0 User’s Guide. Muthén and Muthén, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  49. Schumacker RE, Lomax RG (2004) A Beginner’s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  50. Comrey AL, Lee HB (1992) A First Course in Factor Analysis. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  51. Hu L-t, Bentler PM (1995) Evaluating model fit. In: Hoyle RH (eds) Structural Equation Modeling: Concepts, Issues, and Applications. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp 1–1

    Google Scholar 

  52. Marsh HW, Hau K-T, Grayson D (2005) Goodness of fit in structural equation models. In: Maydeu-Olivares A, McArdle JJ (eds) Contemporary Psychometrics. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 275–340

    Google Scholar 

  53. Byrne BM (2001) Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  54. Bentler PM, Chou C (1987) Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociol Method Res 16:78–117

    Google Scholar 

  55. Hancock GR (2006) Power analysis in covariance structure modeling. In: Hancock GR, Mueller RO (eds) Structural Equation Modeling: A Second Course. IAP, Greenwich, CT, pp 69–118

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Dr. Khanna was supported in part by the Arthritis and Scleroderma Foundations (Physician Scientist Development Award), the Scleroderma Foundation (New Investigator Grant), a National Institutes of Health K12 BIRWCH Scholar Award, the Scleroderma Clinical Trials Consortium, and the Scleroderma Lung Study by Grant No. UO1 HL60587.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Consortia

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jason C. Cole.

Appendix A

Appendix A

On behalf of the Scleroderma Lung Study (SLS) research group, the following investigators also participated:

University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California: Philip J. Clements, MD, MPH; Donald P. Tashkin, MD; Robert Elashoff, PhD; Jonathan Goldin, MD, PhD; Michael Roth, MD; Daniel Furst, MD; Ken Bulpitt, MD; Dinesh Khanna, MD; Wen-Ling Joanie Chung, MPH; Sherrie Viasco, RN; Mildred Sterz, RN, MPH; Lovlette Woolcock; Xiaohong Yan, MS; Judy Ho, Sarinnapha Vasunilashorn; Irene da Costa.

University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey, New Brunswick, New Jersey: James R. Seibold, MD*; David J. Riley, MD; Judith K. Amorosa, MD; Vivien M. Hsu, MD; Deborah A. McCloskey, BSN; Julianne E. Wilson, RN. * Current address: University of Michigan Scleroderma Program, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, Illinois: John Varga, MD; Dean Schraugnagel, MD; Andrew Wilbur, MD; David Lapota, MD; Shiva Arami, MD; Patricia Cole-Saffold, MS.

Boston University, Boston, Massachussettes: Robert Simms, MD; ArthurTheodore, MD; Peter Clarke, MD; Joseph Korn, MD; Kimberley Tobin, Melynn Nuite, BSN.

Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina: Richard Silver, MD; Marcie Bolster, MD; Charlie Strange, MD; Steve Schabel, MD; Edwin Smith, MD; June Arnold; Katie Caldwell; Michael Bonner.

Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland: Robert Wise, MD; Fred Wigley, MD; Barbara White, MD; Laura Hummers, MD; Mark Bohlman, MD; Albert Polito, MD; Gwen Leatherman, MSN; Edrick Forbes, RN; Marie Daniel.

Georgetown University, Washington, DC: zVirginia Steen, MD; Charles Read, MD; Cirrelda Cooper, MD; Sean Wheaton, MD; Anise Carey; Adriana Ortiz.

University of Texas Houston, Houston, Texas: Maureen Mayes, MD, MPH; Ed Parsley, DO; Sandra Oldham, MD; Tan Filemon, MD; Samantha Jordan, RN; Marilyn Perry.

University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California: Kari Connolly, MD; Jeffrey Golden, MD; Paul Wolters, MD; Richard Webb, MD; John Davis, MD; Christine Antolos; Carla Maynetto.

University of Alabama, Birmingham, Alabama: Barri Fessler, MD; Mitchell,Olman, MD; Colleen Sanders, MD; Louis Heck, MD; Tina Parkhill.

University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, Connecticut: Naomi Rothfield, MD; Mark Metersky, MD; Richard Cobb, MD; Macha Aberles, MD; Fran Ingenito, RN; Elena Breen;

Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan: Maureen Mayes, MD; Kamal Mubarak, MD; Jose L Granda, MD; Joseph Silva, MD; Zora Injic, RN, MS; Ronika Alexander, RN.

Virginia Mason Research Center, Seattle, Washington: Daniel Furst, MD; Steven Springmeyer, MD; Steven Kirkland, MD; Jerry Molitor, MD; Richard Hinke, MD; Amanda Mondt, RN.

University of Alabama, Birmingham: Mitchell Olman, MD; Barri Fessler, MD; Colleen Sanders, MD; Louis Heck, MD; Tina Parkhill.

On behalf of the Relaxin study, the following investigators also participated: J Korn, MD, R Simms, MD, P Merkel, MD, Boston University, Boston, MA; NF Rothfield, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT; F Wigley, MD, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD; M Ellman, MD University of Chicago, Chicago, IL; Y Kim, MD, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA; L Moreland, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL; RW Silver, University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC; VD Steen, Division of Rheumatology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC; M Weisman, MD, Cedar Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA; GS Firestein, MD, AF Kavanaugh, MD University of California, San Diego, CA; ME Csuka, MD Medical College of Wisconsin, Madison, WI; MD Mayes, University of Texas Health Science Center, Houston, TX; D Collier, University of Colorado, Denver, CO; TA Medsger, Jr., University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA; and Vivian M Hsu, UMDNJ-Scleroderma Program.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cole, J.C., Khanna, D., Clements, P.J. et al. Single-factor scoring validation for the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI) in patients with systemic sclerosis and comparison with early rheumatoid arthritis patients. Qual Life Res 15, 1383–1394 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-006-0018-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-006-0018-8

Key words

Navigation