Measuring health in injured workers: A cross-sectional comparison of five generic health status instruments in workers with musculoskeletal injuries
✍ Scribed by Dorcas E. Beaton; Claire Bombardier; Sheilah A. Hogg-Johnson
- Publisher
- John Wiley and Sons
- Year
- 1996
- Tongue
- English
- Weight
- 945 KB
- Volume
- 29
- Category
- Article
- ISSN
- 0271-3586
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
✦ Synopsis
The purpose of this study was to compare the measurenient properties ojfive generic health status measures in a cross-sectional study of itljured Mwkers. Ono hundred twenty-seiqen injured r59orkers participated in the study. Fort?..-seven percent had disorders of the upper limb, 12%' neck arid upper back, and 27% lower hock (14% unspecfied). All participants completed a puckage containing: SF-36 (Acute), Nottingham Health Profile (NHP), Duke Heulth Profile (Duke). Health status section of the Ontcirio Heulth Survey (OHS), and the Sickness Impact Profile (SIP). Frequency distributions were examined, correlations carried out, und the cihility to discrimincite between pcirt ($body and overall health state evaluated using analysis of variance. The results showed u wiling (healthy) effect in the OHS, NHP, and SIP. Correlations were nioderute to good. Upper limb subjects appeared "healthier" than low back pain subjects. The instruments were able to discrimitzate between health states ( p < 0.05) except the OHS-Physical junction ( p = 0.51 ). Different questionnaires give a dinerent impression of health. Clinicians und rcwurchers should he thoughtful in their selection oj outcome measures as difjerent instruments may alter the description, intervention, and prioritation of u particular disorder. o 1996 WiIey-Liss, I I K .