The arthritis impact measurement scales. further investigations of a health status measure

Authors

  • Robert F. Meenan MD MPH,

    Associate Professor, Corresponding author
    1. Multipurpose Arthritis Center and the Health Care Research Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, and the Thorndike Memorial Laboratory, Boston City Hospital, Boston, MA.
    • Boston City Hospital ACC 3E–09, 818 Harrison Ave., Boston, MA 02118
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Paul M. Gertman MD,

    Associate Professor of Medicine
    1. Multipurpose Arthritis Center and the Health Care Research Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, and the Thorndike Memorial Laboratory, Boston City Hospital, Boston, MA.
    Search for more papers by this author
  • John H. Mason MA,

    Research Associate
    1. Multipurpose Arthritis Center and the Health Care Research Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, and the Thorndike Memorial Laboratory, Boston City Hospital, Boston, MA.
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Richard Dunaif BS

    Research Associate
    1. Multipurpose Arthritis Center and the Health Care Research Unit, Boston University School of Medicine, and the Thorndike Memorial Laboratory, Boston City Hospital, Boston, MA.
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

The Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (AIMS) have been developed to assess the health status of arthritis patients. In this study, the self-administered AIMS questionnaire, which includes scales designed to measure the physical, psychologic, and social aspects of health status, was completed by 625 patients with various forms of arthritis. A comprehensive battery of analytic techniques was used to investigate the performance of these scales in this large sample. The results confirmed the reliability and validity of the AIMS instrument. They also showed that AIMS performs well in at least 4 major types of arthritis, in a range of sociodemographic groups, and across time. These findings emphasize the strengths of the AIMS approach and suggest that the instrument will prove useful as a tool to assess arthritis outcome in a wide variety of clinical settings.

Ancillary