Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of the stages of completion and scoring of the Patient Generated Index (PGI) in patients with rheumatic diseases

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

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the stages of completion and approaches to scoring the PGI for reliability, validity and responsiveness.

Methods

Participants of inpatient rehabilitation or self-management programmes completed the closed PGI with the same areas at 1 year as baseline. Test–retest reliability, validity and responsiveness were assessed for area scores (stage one), points (stage two) and methods of scoring the PGI.

Results

One hundred and forty-five patients participated, and 118 (81 %) completed the PGI correctly. Test–retest intraclass correlations were over 0.90 for area scores (stage two) and were 0.87 and 0.86 for final PGI scores with and without the sixth “rest of life” box. Individual area scores had the highest correlations with those for instruments assessing similar constructs; those for the area “rest of life” were lower. Compared to scores based on the sum of the stage two areas, PGI scores had higher correlations of a moderate level with those for patient-reported instruments widely used within rheumatology. Correlations were of a similar level with and without the sixth “rest of life” area, and those based on baseline points at follow-up were highest. The PGI had higher SRMs than the other instruments at 1 year, the highest being for PGI scores based on baseline points.

Conclusions

The fully closed version of the PGI, which uses baseline areas and baseline stage three points at follow-up, is most appropriate for assessing outcomes within healthcare evaluation. The sixth “rest of life” area has poorer measurement properties, and its removal does not adversely affect the measurement properties of the PGI.

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. Ruta, D. A., Garratt, A. M., Leng, M., Russell, I. T., & MacDonald, L. M. (1994). A new approach to the measurement of quality of life. The Patient-Generated Index. Medical Care, 32(11), 1109–1126.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Martin, F., Camfield, L., Rodham, K., Kliempt, P., & Ruta, D. (2007). Twelve years’ experience with the Patient Generated Index (PGI) of quality of life: A graded structured review. Quality of Life Research, 16(4), 705–715.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Klokkerud, M., Grotle, M., Løchting, I., Kjeken, I., Hagen, K. B., & Garratt, A. M. (2013). Psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the Patient Generated Index in patients with rheumatic diseases participating in rehabilitation or self-management programs. Rheumatology (Oxford), 52(5), 924–932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Løchting, I., Grotle, M., Storheim, K., Werner, E. L., & Garratt, A. M. (2014). Individualised quality of life in patients with low back pain: Reliability and validity of the Patient Generated Index (PGI). Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 46(8), 781–787.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ruta, D. A., Garratt, A. M., & Russell, I. T. (1999). Patient centred assessment of quality of life for patients with four common conditions. Quality in Health Care, 8(1), 22–29.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Haywood, K. L., Garratt, A. M., Dziedzic, K., & Dawes, P. T. (2003). Patient centered assessment of ankylosing spondylitis-specific health related quality of life: Evaluation of the Patient Generated Index. Journal of Rheumatology, 30(4), 764–773.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status instruments: An international Delphi study. Quality of Life Research, 19(4), 539–549.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Garratt, A. M., Løchting, I., Smedslund, G., & Hagen, K. B. (2014). Measurement properties of instruments for assessing self-efficacy in patients with rheumatic diseases: A systematic review. Rheumatology (Oxford), 53(7), 1161–1171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Uhlig, T., Haavardsholm, E. A., & Kvien, T. K. (2006). Comparison of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and modified HAQ (MHAQ) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology, 45(4), 454–458.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Barlow, J. H., Williams, B., & Wright, C. C. (1997). The reliability and validity of the arthritis self-efficacy scale in a UK context. Psychology Health and Medicine, 2(1), 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bentler, P. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tucker, L., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen & J. S. Long (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136–162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modelling, 6(1), 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Løchting, I., Garratt, A. M., Klokkerud, M., & Fjernstad, E. (2012). Development of the Rheumatic Disease Illness Perception Questionnaire (RD-IPQ): Reliability, validity and responsiveness. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 30(2), 308.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Loge, J. H., Kaasa, S., Hjermstad, M. J., & Kvien, T. K. (1998). Translation and performance of the Norwegian SF-36 Health Survey in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. I. Data quality, scaling assumptions, reliability, and construct validity. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51(11), 1069–1176.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., & Dewey, J. E. (2000). How to score Version 2 of the SF-36 Health Survey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wahl, A. K., Rustoen, T., Hanestad, B. R., Lerdal, A., & Moum, T. (2004). Quality of life in the general Norwegian population, measured by the Quality of Life Scale (QOLS-N). Quality of Life Research, 13(5), 1001–1009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wahl, A., Burckhardt, C., Wiklund, I., & Hanestad, B. R. (1998). The Norwegian version of the Quality of Life Scale (QOLS-N). A validation and reliability study in patients suffering from psoriasis. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 12(4), 215–222.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fleiss, J. L., & Cohen, J. (1973). The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 33(3), 613–619.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Katz, J. N., Larson, M. G., Phillips, C. B., Fossel, A. H., & Liang, M. H. (1992). Comparative measurement sensitivity of short and longer form health status instruments. Medical Care, 30(10), 917–925.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hush, J. M., Kamper, S. J., Stanton, T. R., Ostelo, R., & Refshauge, K. M. (2012). Standardized measurement of recovery from nonspecific back pain. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 93(5), 849–855.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jenkinson, C., Stradling, J., & Petersen, S. (1998). How should we evaluate health status? A comparison of three methods in patients presenting with obstructive sleep apnoea. Quality of Life Research, 7(2), 95–100.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Garratt, A. M., & Ruta, D. A. (1996). Taking a patient-centred approach to outcome measurement. In A. Hutchinson, E. McColl, M. Christie, & C. Riccalton (Eds.), Health outcome measures in primary care (pp. 77–89). Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Løchting, I., Fjerstad, E., & Garratt, A. M. (2013). Illness perceptions in patients receiving rheumatology rehabilitation: Association with health and outcomes at 12 months. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 14, 28.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Ida Løchting and Mari Klokkerud had responsibility for data collection with help from staff at participating centres.

Conflict of interest

The author has no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department for Quality and Patient Safety, Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Boks 7004, St Olavs plass, 0130, Oslo, Norway

    Andrew M. Garratt

Authors
  1. Andrew M. Garratt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew M. Garratt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Garratt, A.M. Evaluation of the stages of completion and scoring of the Patient Generated Index (PGI) in patients with rheumatic diseases. Qual Life Res 24, 2625–2635 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1014-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-1014-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation