Rheumatoid Arthritis

You have full text access to this OnlineOpen article

Rasch analysis of the Dutch health assessment questionnaire disability index and the health assessment questionnaire II in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

  1. Peter M. ten Klooster1,*,
  2. ERIK TAAL1,
  3. Mart A. F. J. van de Laar2

Article first published online: 26 NOV 2008

DOI: 10.1002/art.24065

Issue

Arthritis Care & Research

Arthritis Care & Research

Volume 59, Issue 12, pages 1721–1728, 15 December 2008

Additional Information

How to Cite

ten Klooster, P. M., TAAL, E. and van de Laar, M. A. F. J. (2008), Rasch analysis of the Dutch health assessment questionnaire disability index and the health assessment questionnaire II in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis & Rheumatism, 59: 1721–1728. doi: 10.1002/art.24065

Author Information

  1. 1

    University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

  2. 2

    Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands

*Institute for Behavioral Research, Faculty of Behavioral Sciences, University of Twente, PO Box 217, 7500 AE Enschede, The Netherlands

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 26 NOV 2008
  2. Article first published online: 26 NOV 2008
  3. Manuscript Accepted: 1 AUG 2008
  4. Manuscript Received: 31 JAN 2008

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (223K)

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Boers M, Tugwell P, Felson DT, van Riel PL, Kirwan JR, Edmonds JP, et al. World Health Organization and International League of Associations for Rheumatology core endpoints for symptom modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. J Rheumatol 1994; 21: 86–9.
  • 2
    Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M, Bombardier C, Chernoff M, Fried B, et al. The American College of Rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. Arthritis Rheum 1993; 36: 729–40.
    Direct Link:
  • 3
    Wolfe F, Lassere M, van der Heijde D, Stucki G, Suarez-Almazor M, Pincus T, et al. Preliminary core set of domains and reporting requirements for longitudinal observational studies in rheumatology. J Rheumatol 1999; 26: 484–9.
  • 4
    Fries JF, Spitz P, Kraines RG, Holman HR. Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1980; 23: 137–45.
    Direct Link:
  • 5
    Fries JF, Spitz PW, Young DY. The dimensions of health outcomes: the Health Assessment Questionnaire, disability and pain scales. J Rheumatol 1982; 9: 789–93.
  • 6
    Bruce B, Fries JF. The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire: dimensions and practical applications [review]. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1: 20.
  • 7
    Bruce B, Fries JF. The Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire: a review of its history, issues, progress, and documentation. J Rheumatol 2003; 30: 167–78.
  • 8
    Stucki G, Stucki S, Bruhlmann P, Michel BA. Ceiling effects of the Health Assessment Questionnaire and its modified version in some ambulatory rheumatoid arthritis patients. Ann Rheum Dis 1995; 54: 461–5.
  • 9
    Pincus T, Swearingen C, Wolfe F. Toward a Multidimensional Health Assessment Questionnaire (MDHAQ): assessment of advanced activities of daily living and psychological status in the patient-friendly Health Assessment Questionnaire format. Arthritis Rheum 1999; 42: 2220–30.
    Direct Link:
  • 10
    Tennant A, Hillman M, Fear J, Pickering A, Chamberlain MA. Are we making the most of the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire? Br J Rheumatol 1996; 35: 574–8.
  • 11
    Uhlig T, Haavardsholm EA, Kvien TK. Comparison of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and the modified HAQ (MHAQ) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2006; 45: 454–8.
  • 12
    Wolfe F. The psychometrics of functional status questionnaires: room for improvement. J Rheumatol 2002; 29: 865–8.
  • 13
    Taylor WJ, McPherson KM. Using Rasch analysis to compare the psychometric properties of the Short Form 36 physical function score and the Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index in patients with psoriatic arthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2007; 57: 723–9.
    Direct Link:
  • 14
    Wolfe F, Michaud K, Pincus T. Development and validation of the Health Assessment Questionnaire II: a revised version of the Health Assessment Questionnaire. Arthritis Rheum 2004; 50: 3296–305.
    Direct Link:
  • 15
    Zandbelt MM, Welsing PM, van Gestel AM, van Riel PL. Health Assessment Questionnaire modifications: is standardisation needed? Ann Rheum Dis 2001; 60: 841–5.
  • 16
    Boers M, Jacobs JW, van Vliet Vlieland TP, van Riel PL. Consensus Dutch Health Assessment Questionnaire. Ann Rheum Dis 2007; 66: 132–3.
  • 17
    Ware JE, Kosinski M, Dewey JE. How to score version 2 of the SF-36 health survey. Lincoln (RI): QualityMetric Incorporated; 2000.
  • 18
    Hays RD, Morales LS, Reise SP. Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Med Care 2000; 38: II28–42.
  • 19
    Reeve BB, Fayers P. Applying item response theory modelling for evaluating questionnaire item and scale properties. In: FayersPM, HaysRD, editors. Assessing quality of life in clinical trials: methods and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005. p. 55–73.
  • 20
    Tennant A, McKenna SP, Hagell P. Application of Rasch analysis in the development and application of quality of life instruments. Value Health 2004; 7 Suppl 1: S22–6.
    Direct Link:
  • 21
    Wolfe F, Kong SX. Rasch analysis of the Western Ontario MacMaster questionnaire (WOMAC) in 2205 patients with osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and fibromyalgia. Ann Rheum Dis 1999; 58: 563–8.
  • 22
    Roorda LD, Jones CA, Waltz M, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM, van der Eijken JW, et al. Satisfactory cross cultural equivalence of the Dutch WOMAC in patients with hip osteoarthritis waiting for arthroplasty. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63: 36–42.
  • 23
    Ryser L, Wright BD, Aeschlimann A, Mariacher-Gehler S, Stucki G. A new look at the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index using Rasch analysis. Arthritis Care Res 1999; 12: 331–5.
    Direct Link:
  • 24
    Wolfe F, Hawley DJ, Goldenberg DL, Russell IJ, Buskila D, Neumann L. The assessment of functional impairment in fibromyalgia (FM): Rasch analyses of 5 functional scales and the development of the FM Health Assessment Questionnaire. J Rheumatol 2000; 27: 1989–99.
  • 25
    Wolfe F. Which HAQ is best? A comparison of the HAQ, MHAQ and RA-HAQ, a difficult 8 item HAQ (DHAQ), and a rescored 20 item HAQ (HAQ20): analyses in 2,491 rheumatoid arthritis patients following leflunomide initiation. J Rheumatol 2001; 28: 982–9.
  • 26
    Pouchot J, Ecosse E, Coste J, Guillemin F, for the French Quality of Life Study Group and the Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation. Validity of the Childhood Health Assessment Questionnaire is independent of age in juvenile idiopathic arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2004; 51: 519–26.
    Direct Link:
  • 27
    Kucukdeveci AA, Sahin H, Ataman S, Griffiths B, Tennant A. Issues in cross-cultural validity: example from the adaptation, reliability, and validity testing of a Turkish version of the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire. Arthritis Rheum 2004; 51: 14–9.
    Direct Link:
  • 28
    Durez P, Fraselle V, Houssiau F, Thonnard JL, Nielens H, Penta M. Validation of the ABILHAND questionnaire as a measure of manual ability in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2007; 66: 1098–105.
  • 29
    Masters G. A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika 1982; 47: 149–174.
  • 30
    Wright BD, Linacre JM, Gustafson JE, Martin-Lof P. Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Meas Trans 1994; 8: 370.
  • 31
    Linacre JM. A user's guide to WINSTEPS MINISTEP Rasch-model computer programs. Chicago: Winsteps; 2006.
  • 32
    Davidson M, Keating JL, Eyres S. A low back-specific version of the SF-36 physical functioning scale. Spine 2004; 29: 586–94.
  • 33
    Tennant A, Conaghan PG. The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: what is it and why use it? When should it be applied, and what should one look for in a Rasch paper? Arthritis Rheum 2007; 57: 1358–62.
    Direct Link:
  • 34
    Draba RE. The identification and interpretation of item bias (research memorandum no. 25). Chicago: University of Chicago; 1977.
  • 35
    Lai JS, Teresi J, Gershon R. Procedures for the analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) for small sample sizes. Eval Health Prof 2005; 28: 283–94.
  • 36
    Linacre M. Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Meas Trans 1994; 7: 328.
  • 37
    Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1: 307–10.
  • 38
    Smith RM, Schumacker RE, Bush MJ. Using item mean squares to evaluate fit to the Rasch model. J Outcome Meas 1998; 2: 66–78.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (223K)