Cathy D. Sherbourne

The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups

The widespread use of standardized health surveys is predicated on the largely untested assumption that scales constructed from those surveys will satisfy minimum psychometric requirements across diverse population groups. Data from the Medical Outcomes Study (MOS) were used to evaluate data completeness and quality, test scaling assumptions, and estimate internal-consistency reliability for the eight scales constructed from the MOS SF-36 Health Survey. Analyses were conducted among 3,445 patients and were replicated across 24 subgroups differing in sociodemographic characteristics, diagnosis, and disease severity. For each scale, item-completion rates were high across all groups (88% to 95%), but tended to be somewhat lower among the elderly, those with less than a high school education, and those in poverty. On average, surveys were complete enough to compute scale scores for more than 96% of the sample. Across patient groups, all scales passed tests for item-internal consistency (97% passed) and item-discriminant validity (92% passed). Reliability coefficients ranged from a low of 0.65 to a high of 0.94 across scales (median=0.85) and varied somewhat across patient subgroups. Floor effects were negligible except for the two role disability scales. Noteworthy ceiling effects were observed for both role disability scales and the social functioning scale. These findings support the use of the SF-36 survey across the diverse populations studied and identify population groups in which use of standardized health status measures may or may not be problematic.

COMPARISON OF HEALTH OUTCOMES AT A HEALTH MAINTENANCE ORGANISATION WITH THOSE OF FEE-FOR-SERVICE CARE

To determine whether health outcomes in a health maintenance organisation (HMO) differed from those in the fee-for-service (FFS) system, 1673 individuals ages 14 to 61 were randomly assigned to one HMO or to an FFS insurance plan in Seattle, Washington for 3 or 5 years. For non-poor individuals assigned to the HMO who were initially in good health there were no adverse effects. Health outcomes in the two systems of care differed for high and low income individuals who began the experiment with health problems. For the high income initially sick group, the HMO produced significant improvements in cholesterol levels and in general health ratings by comparison with free FFS care. The low income initially sick group assigned to the HMO reported significantly more bed-days per year due to poor health and more serious symptoms than those assigned free FFS care, and a greater risk of dying by comparison with pay FFS plans.

Exploring Alternative Approaches to Routine Outpatient Pain Screening

OBJECTIVEnTo evaluate potential alternatives to the numeric rating scale (NRS) for routine pain screening.nnnDESIGNnCross-sectional.nnnSETTINGnNineteen Veterans Affairs outpatient clinics in Southern California at two hospitals and six community sites.nnnPATIENTSnFive hundred twenty-eight veterans from primary care, cardiology, and oncology clinics sampled in proportion to the total number of visits made to each clinic during the previous year.nnnMETHODSnVeterans were approached following clinic visits to complete researcher-administered surveys about their clinic experience. Using the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) interference scale of > or =5 as a reference standard for important unrelieved pain, we evaluated potential alternative pain screening items and item combinations by analyzing sensitivity and specificity, area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), and likelihood ratios.nnnRESULTSnOf the veterans, 43.6% had unrelieved pain as measured by the reference standard. Approximately half had painful musculoskeletal diagnoses and one-third had comorbid mental health or substance use disorders. The fifth vital sign detected pain less accurately than did an NRS with a 1-week timeframe and an item assessing pain-related bother over the past week. AUCs were 0.79, 0.86, and 0.86, respectively. A sequential approach combining the pain-related bother and NRS with a 1-week timeframe items had good discriminatory ability.nnnCONCLUSIONSnAlternative single or combined pain screening strategies assessing pain-related bother may improve routine pain detection.

Development and Maintenance of Standardized Cross Setting Patient Assessment Data for Post-Acute Care: Summary Report of Findings from Alpha 1 Pilot Testing

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) contracted with the RAND Corporation to identify and/or develop standardized items to include in the post-acute care patient assessment instruments. RAND was tasked by CMS with developing and testing items to measure seven areas of health status for Medicare beneficiaries: (1) vision and hearing; (2) cognitive status; (3) depressed mood; (4) pain; (5) care preferences; (6) medication reconciliation; and (7) bladder and bowel continence. This article presents results of the first Alpha 1 feasibility test of a proposed set of items for measuring each of these health status areas. Conducted between August and October 2016, the test is one of two Alpha tests that will be completed by mid-2017 to assess the feasibility of proposed items. The results of these small-scale feasibility tests will inform a national Beta test designed to determine how well the measures perform when implemented in post-acute care settings. The Alpha 1 testing phase was successfully completed, in that all items were pilot tested among 133 patients. Items from all content areas were assessed on interrater reliability and feasibility; items from some content areas were assessed on other metrics. Items have now been revised, when necessary, based on the findings of the Alpha 1 test. Alpha 2 testing is under way with the updated, revised items.