Get access

Evidence-based guidelines for using the Short Form 36 in cervical dystonia

Authors

  • Stefan J. Cano PhD,

    1. Neurological Outcomes Measures Unit, Institute of Neurology, University College London, United Kingdom
    2. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Peninsula Medical School, Plymouth, United Kingdom
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Alan J. Thompson MD,

    1. Neurological Outcomes Measures Unit, Institute of Neurology, University College London, United Kingdom
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Khailash Bhatia MD,

    1. Sobell Department of Motor Neuroscience and Movement Disorders, University College London, United Kingdom
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Ray Fitzpatrick PhD,

    1. Department of Public Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Thomas T. Warner PhD,

    1. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Royal Free & University College Medical School, London, United Kingdom
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Jeremy C. Hobart PhD

    Corresponding author
    1. Neurological Outcomes Measures Unit, Institute of Neurology, University College London, United Kingdom
    2. Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Peninsula Medical School, Plymouth, United Kingdom
    • Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Peninsula Medical School, Tamar Science Park, Plymouth, PL6 8DH, UK
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

We aimed to provide evidence-based guidelines for using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) as an outcome measure in cervical dystonia (CD). To do this, we tested the hypothesized relationships between items, scales, and summary measures of the SF-36 using psychometric analyses in data from a postal survey of 235 people with CD. Although the majority of subscales performed adequately, the Role Physical and Role Emotional subscales had substantial floor and/or ceiling effects. Evidence did not support computing SF-36 Physical and Mental Component Summary scores. We propose guidelines that include the recommendation that these subscale and summary scores should be reported with caution. © 2006 Movement Disorder Society

Ancillary