Cargando…

Development of the SF-6Dv2 health utility survey: comprehensibility and patient preference

BACKGROUND: The SF-6Dv2 classification system assesses health states in six domains—physical functioning, role function, bodily pain, vitality, social functioning, and mental health. Scores have previously been derived from the SF-36v2® Health Survey. We aimed to develop a six-item stand-alone SF-6D...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Broderick, Lynne, Bjorner, Jakob B., Lauher-Charest, Miranda, White, Michelle K., Kosinski, Mark, Mulhern, Brendan, Brazier, John
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9096746/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35551545
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-022-00455-w
_version_ 1784706044928196608
author Broderick, Lynne
Bjorner, Jakob B.
Lauher-Charest, Miranda
White, Michelle K.
Kosinski, Mark
Mulhern, Brendan
Brazier, John
author_facet Broderick, Lynne
Bjorner, Jakob B.
Lauher-Charest, Miranda
White, Michelle K.
Kosinski, Mark
Mulhern, Brendan
Brazier, John
author_sort Broderick, Lynne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The SF-6Dv2 classification system assesses health states in six domains—physical functioning, role function, bodily pain, vitality, social functioning, and mental health. Scores have previously been derived from the SF-36v2® Health Survey. We aimed to develop a six-item stand-alone SF-6Dv2 Health Utility Survey (SF-6Dv2 HUS) and evaluate its comprehensibility. METHODS: Two forms of a stand-alone SF-6Dv2 HUS were developed for evaluation. Form A had 6 questions with 5–6 response choices, while Form B used 6 headings and 5–6 statements describing the health levels within each domain. The two forms were evaluated by 40 participants, recruited from the general population. Participants were randomized to debrief one form of the stand-alone SF-6Dv2 HUS during a 75-min interview, using think-aloud techniques followed by an interviewer-led detailed review. Participants then reviewed the other form of SF-6Dv2 and determined which they preferred. Any issues or confusion with items was recorded, as was as overall preference. Data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and NVivo Software (v12). RESULTS: Participants were able to easily complete both forms. Participant feedback supported the comprehensibility of the SF-6Dv2 HUS. When comparing forms, 25/40 participants preferred Form A, finding it clearer and easier to answer when presented in question/response format. The numbered questions and underlining of key words in Form A fostered quick and easy comprehension and completion of the survey. However, despite an overall preference for Form A, almost half of participants (n = 19) preferred the physical functioning item in Form B, with more descriptive response choices. CONCLUSION: The results support using Form A, with modifications to the physical functioning item, as the stand-alone SF-6Dv2 HUS. The stand-alone SF-6Dv2 HUS is brief, easy to administer, and comprehensible to the general population.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9096746
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90967462022-05-12 Development of the SF-6Dv2 health utility survey: comprehensibility and patient preference Broderick, Lynne Bjorner, Jakob B. Lauher-Charest, Miranda White, Michelle K. Kosinski, Mark Mulhern, Brendan Brazier, John J Patient Rep Outcomes Research BACKGROUND: The SF-6Dv2 classification system assesses health states in six domains—physical functioning, role function, bodily pain, vitality, social functioning, and mental health. Scores have previously been derived from the SF-36v2® Health Survey. We aimed to develop a six-item stand-alone SF-6Dv2 Health Utility Survey (SF-6Dv2 HUS) and evaluate its comprehensibility. METHODS: Two forms of a stand-alone SF-6Dv2 HUS were developed for evaluation. Form A had 6 questions with 5–6 response choices, while Form B used 6 headings and 5–6 statements describing the health levels within each domain. The two forms were evaluated by 40 participants, recruited from the general population. Participants were randomized to debrief one form of the stand-alone SF-6Dv2 HUS during a 75-min interview, using think-aloud techniques followed by an interviewer-led detailed review. Participants then reviewed the other form of SF-6Dv2 and determined which they preferred. Any issues or confusion with items was recorded, as was as overall preference. Data were analyzed using Microsoft Excel and NVivo Software (v12). RESULTS: Participants were able to easily complete both forms. Participant feedback supported the comprehensibility of the SF-6Dv2 HUS. When comparing forms, 25/40 participants preferred Form A, finding it clearer and easier to answer when presented in question/response format. The numbered questions and underlining of key words in Form A fostered quick and easy comprehension and completion of the survey. However, despite an overall preference for Form A, almost half of participants (n = 19) preferred the physical functioning item in Form B, with more descriptive response choices. CONCLUSION: The results support using Form A, with modifications to the physical functioning item, as the stand-alone SF-6Dv2 HUS. The stand-alone SF-6Dv2 HUS is brief, easy to administer, and comprehensible to the general population. Springer International Publishing 2022-05-12 /pmc/articles/PMC9096746/ /pubmed/35551545 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-022-00455-w Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Research
Broderick, Lynne
Bjorner, Jakob B.
Lauher-Charest, Miranda
White, Michelle K.
Kosinski, Mark
Mulhern, Brendan
Brazier, John
Development of the SF-6Dv2 health utility survey: comprehensibility and patient preference
title Development of the SF-6Dv2 health utility survey: comprehensibility and patient preference
title_full Development of the SF-6Dv2 health utility survey: comprehensibility and patient preference
title_fullStr Development of the SF-6Dv2 health utility survey: comprehensibility and patient preference
title_full_unstemmed Development of the SF-6Dv2 health utility survey: comprehensibility and patient preference
title_short Development of the SF-6Dv2 health utility survey: comprehensibility and patient preference
title_sort development of the sf-6dv2 health utility survey: comprehensibility and patient preference
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9096746/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35551545
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s41687-022-00455-w
work_keys_str_mv AT brodericklynne developmentofthesf6dv2healthutilitysurveycomprehensibilityandpatientpreference
AT bjornerjakobb developmentofthesf6dv2healthutilitysurveycomprehensibilityandpatientpreference
AT lauhercharestmiranda developmentofthesf6dv2healthutilitysurveycomprehensibilityandpatientpreference
AT whitemichellek developmentofthesf6dv2healthutilitysurveycomprehensibilityandpatientpreference
AT kosinskimark developmentofthesf6dv2healthutilitysurveycomprehensibilityandpatientpreference
AT mulhernbrendan developmentofthesf6dv2healthutilitysurveycomprehensibilityandpatientpreference
AT brazierjohn developmentofthesf6dv2healthutilitysurveycomprehensibilityandpatientpreference