Measurement properties of physical function scales validated for use in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: A systematic review of the literature

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Mart AFJ van de Laar¹  Erik Taal²  Peter M ten Klooster²  Martijn AH Oude Voshaar² 

[1] Department of Rheumatology, Medisch Spectrum Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands;Arthritis Center Twente, University of Twente, Department of Psychology, Health and Technology, Enschede, The Netherlands

关键词: measurement properties;    responsiveness;    reliability;    validity;    psychometric;    rheumatoid arthritis;    disability;    Physical function;   

Others  :  826281
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7525-9-99

 received in 2011-07-25, accepted in 2011-11-07,  发布年份 2011

【 摘 要 】

Background

The aim of this study was to systematically review the content validity and measurement properties of all physical function (PF) scales which are currently validated for use with patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

Systematic literature searches were performed in the Scopus and PubMed databases to identify articles on the development or psychometric evaluation of PF scales for patients with RA. The content validity of included scales was evaluated by linking their items to the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF). Furthermore, available evidence of the reliability, validity, responsiveness, and interpretability of the included scales was rated according to published quality criteria.

Results

The search identified 26 questionnaires with PF scales. Ten questionnaires were rated to have adequate content validity. Construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability and responsiveness was rated favourably for respectively 15, 11, 5, and 6 of the investigated scales. Information about the absolute measurement error and minimal important change scores were rarely reported.

Conclusion

Based on this literature review, the disease-specificHAQ and the generic SF-36 can currently be most confidently recommended to measure PF in RA for most research purposes. The HAQ, however, was frequently associated with considerable ceiling effects while the SF-36 has limited content coverage. Alternative scales that might be better suited for specific research purposes are identified along with future directions for research.

【 授权许可】

   
2011 Oude Voshaar et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Boers M, Tugwell P, Felson DT, van Riel PL, Kirwan JR, Edmonds JP, Smolen JS, Khaltaev N, Muirden KD: World Health Organization and International League of Associations for Rheumatology core endpoints for symptom modifying antirheumatic drugs in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. J Rheumatol Suppl 1994, 41:86-89.
• [2]Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Boers M, Bombardier C, Chernoff M, Fried B, Furst D, Goldsmith C, Kieszak S, Lightfoot R, et al.: The American College of Rheumatology preliminary core set of disease activity measures for rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials. The Committee on Outcome Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis Clinical Trials. Arthritis Rheum 1993, 36(6):729-740.
• [3]Bruce B, Fries JF: The Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005, 23(5 Suppl 39):S14-18.
• [4]Kalyoncu U, Dougados M, Daures JP, Gossec L: Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in recent trials in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review. Ann Rheum Dis 2009, 68(2):183-190.
• [5]Wolfe F, Lassere M, van der Heijde D, Stucki G, Suarez-Almazor M, Pincus T, Eberhardt K, Kvien TK, Symmons D, Silman A, et al.: Preliminary core set of domains and reporting requirements for longitudinal observational studies in rheumatology. J Rheumatol 1999, 26(2):484-489.
• [6]Carr A: Adult Measures of Quality of Life: The Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (AIMS/AIMS2), Disease Repercussion Profile (DRP), EuroQoL, Nottingham Health Profile (NHP), Patient Generated Index (PGI), Quality of Well Being Scale (QWB), RAQoL, Short Form 36 (SF 36), Sickness Impact Profile (SIP), SIP RA, and World Health Organization's Quality of Life Instruments (WHOQoL, WHOQoL 100, WHOQoL Bref). Arthritis Care & Research 2003, 49(S5):S113-S133.
• [7]Katz PP: Measures of adult general functional status: The barthel index, katz index of activities of daily living, health assessment questionnaire (HAQ), MACTAR patient preference disability questionnaire, and modified health assessment questionnaire (MHAQ). Arthrit care res 2003, 49(5):S15-S27.
• [8]Lubeck DP: Health-related quality of life measurements and studies in rheumatoid arthritis. Am J Manag Care 2002, 8(9):811-820.
• [9]Stenstrom CH, Nisell R: Assessment of disease consequences in rheumatoid arthritis: a survey of methods classified according to the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities, and Handicaps. Arthritis Care Res 1997, 10(2):135-150.
• [10]Wolfe F, Pincus T: Listening to the patient: a practical guide to self-report questionnaires in clinical care. Arthritis Rheum 1999, 42(9):1797-1808.
• [11]Lillegraven S, Kvien TK: Measuring disability and quality of life in established rheumatoid arthritis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2007, 21(5):827-840.
• [12]Organization WH: International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. World Health Organization; 2001.
• [13]Räty S, Aromaa A, Koponen P: Measurement of physical functioning in comprehensive national health surveys - ICF as a framework. National Public Health Institute, KTL; 2003.
• [14]Stucki G, Cieza A: The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Sets for rheumatoid arthritis: a way to specify functioning. Annals of the rheumatic diseases 2004, 63(suppl 2):ii40.
• [15]Boonen A, Stucki G, Maksymowych W, Rat AC, Escorpizo R, Boers M: The OMERACT-ICF Reference Group: integrating the ICF into the OMERACT process: opportunities and challenges. J Rheumatol 2009, 36(9):2057-2060.
• [16]Terwee CB, Jansma EP, Riphagen II, de Vet HC: Development of a methodological PubMed search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments. Qual Life Res 2009, 18(8):1115-1123.
• [17]Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC: Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007, 60(1):34-42.
• [18]van der Leeden M, Steultjens MP, Terwee CB, Rosenbaum D, Turner D, Woodburn J, Dekker J: A systematic review of instruments measuring foot function, foot pain, and foot-related disability in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2008, 59(9):1257-1269.
• [19]Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC: The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res 2010, 19(4):539-549.
• [20]Lohr KN, Aaronson NK, Alonso J, Burnam MA, Patrick DL, Perrin EB, Roberts JS: Evaluating quality-of-life and health status instruments: development of scientific review criteria. Clin Ther 1996, 18(5):979-992.
• [21]Guyatt GH, Feeny DH, Patrick DL: Measuring health-related quality of life. Ann Intern Med 1993, 118(8):622-629.
• [22]Cieza A, Geyh S, Chatterji S, Kostanjsek N, Ustun B, Stucki G: ICF linking rules: an update based on lessons learned. J Rehabil Med 2005, 37(4):212-218.
• [23]Kirshner B, Guyatt G: A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chronic Dis 1985, 38(1):27-36.
• [24]Ten Klooster PM, Oude Voshaar MA, Taal E, van de Laar MA: Comparison of measures of functional disability in patients with gout. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2011, 50(4):709-713.
• [25]ten Klooster PM, Taal E, van de Laar MA: Rasch analysis of the Dutch Health Assessment Questionnaire disability index and the Health Assessment Questionnaire II in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2008, 59(12):1721-1728.
• [26]Suurmeijer TP, Doeglas DM, Moum T, Briancon S, Krol B, Sanderman R, Guillemin F, Bjelle A, van den Heuvel WJ: The Groningen Activity Restriction Scale for measuring disability: its utility in international comparisons. Am J Public Health 1994, 84(8):1270-1273.
• [27]Chiou CF, Sherbourne CD, Cornelio I, Lubeck DP, Paulus HE, Dylan M, Chang CH, Weisman MH: Development and validation of the revised Cedars-Sinai health-related quality of life for rheumatoid arthritis instrument. Arthritis Rheum 2006, 55(6):856-863.
• [28]Chiou CF, Sherbourne CD, Cornelio I, Lubeck DP, Paulus HE, Dylan M, Weisman M: Revalidation of the original Cedars-Sinai health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis questionnaire. J Rheumatol 2006, 33(2):256-262.
• [29]Russak SM, Sherbourne CD, Lubeck DP, Paulus HD, Chiou CF, Sengupta N, Borenstein J, Ofman J, Moadel A, Weisman MH: Validation of a rheumatoid arthritis health-related quality of life instrument, the CSHQ-RA. Arthritis Rheum 2003, 49(6):798-803.
• [30]Potts MK, Brandt KD: Evidence of the validity of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales. Arthritis Rheum 1987, 30(1):93-96.
• [31]Salaffi F, Stancati A, Neri R, Grassi W, Bombardieri S: Measuring functional disability in early rheumatoid arthritis: the validity, reliability and responsiveness of the Recent-Onset Arthritis Disability (ROAD) index. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005, 23(5 Suppl 39):S31-42.
• [32]Peck JR, Smith TW, Ward JR, Milano R: Disability and depression in rheumatoid arthritis. A multi-trait, multi-method investigation. Arthritis Rheum 1989, 32(9):1100-1106.
• [33]Swinscow TDV, Campbell MJ, ebrary I: Statistics at square one. Bmj London; 2002.
• [34]Bland JM, Altman DG: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 1(8476):307-310.
• [35]Bland JM, Altman DG: Measurement error and correlation coefficients. BMJ 1996, 313(7048):41-42.
• [36]Guyatt GH, Deyo RA, Charlson M, Levine MN, Mitchell A: Responsiveness and validity in health status measurement: a clarification. J Clin Epidemiol 1989, 42(5):403-408.
• [37]Revicki DA, Cella D, Hays RD, Sloan JA, Lenderking WR, Aaronson NK: Responsiveness and minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006, 4:70. BioMed Central Full Text
• [38]Verhoeven AC, Boers M, van Der Linden S: Responsiveness of the core set, response criteria, and utilities in early rheumatoid arthritis. Ann Rheum Dis 2000, 59(12):966-974.
• [39]Cohen J: Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988.
• [40]Pincus T, Sokka T, Kautiainen H: Further development of a physical function scale on a MDHAQ [corrected] for standard care of patients with rheumatic diseases. J Rheumatol 2005, 32(8):1432-1439.
• [41]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(10):3296-3305.
• [42]Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD: The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992, 30(6):473-483.
• [43]Donner A, Eliasziw M: Sample size requirements for reliability studies. Stat Med 1987, 6(4):441-448.
• [44]Giraudeau B, Mary JY: Planning a reproducibility study: how many subjects and how many replicates per subject for an expected width of the 95 per cent confidence interval of the intraclass correlation coefficient. Stat Med 2001, 20(21):3205-3214.
• [45]Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [http://www.nihpromis.org/] webcite
• [46]Fries JF, Cella D, Rose M, Krishnan E, Bruce B: Progress in assessing physical function in arthritis: PROMIS short forms and computerized adaptive testing. J Rheumatol 2009, 36(9):2061-2066.
• [47]Fries JF, Krishnan E, Rose M, Lingala B, Bruce B: Improved responsiveness and reduced sample size requirements of PROMIS physical function scales with item response theory. Arthritis Res Ther 2011, 13(5):R147. BioMed Central Full Text
• [48]Rose M, Bjorner JB, Becker J, Fries JF, Ware JE: Evaluation of a preliminary physical function item bank supported the expected advantages of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). J Clin Epidemiol 2008, 61(1):17-33.
• [49]Lindner HY, Natterlund BS, Hermansson LM: Upper limb prosthetic outcome measures: review and content comparison based on International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Prosthet Orthot Int 2010, 34(2):109-128.
• [50]Stamm T, Geyh S, Cieza A, Machold K, Kollerits B, Kloppenburg M, Smolen J, Stucki G: Measuring functioning in patients with hand osteoarthritis--content comparison of questionnaires based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Rheumatology (Oxford) 2006, 45(12):1534-1541.
• [51]Tesio L: From codes to language: is the ICF a classification system or a dictionary? BMC Public Health 2011, 11(Suppl 4):S2. BioMed Central Full Text
• [52]Gebhardt C, Kirchberger I, Stucki G, Cieza A: Validation of the comprehensive ICF Core Set for rheumatoid arthritis: the perspective of physicians. J Rehabil Med 2010, 42(8):780-788.
• [53]Coenen M, Cieza A, Stamm TA, Amann E, Kollerits B, Stucki G: Validation of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) Core Set for rheumatoid arthritis from the patient perspective using focus groups. Arthritis Res Ther 2006, 8(4):R84. BioMed Central Full Text
• [54]Chu EM, Chiu KY, Wong RW, Tang WM, Lau CS: Translation and validation of Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2 into Chinese: CAIMS2. Arthritis Rheum 2004, 51(1):20-27.
• [55]Rosemann T, Szecsenyi J: Cultural adaptation and validation of a German version of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales (AIMS2). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2007, 15(10):1128-1133.
• [56]Bakheit A, Harries SR, Hull RG: Validity of a self-administered version of the Barthel Index in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Rehabil 1995, 9(3):234-237.
• [57]Doeglas D, Krol B, Guillemin F, Suurmeijer T, Sanderman R, Smedstad LM, Briancon S, van den Heuvel W: The assessment of functional status in rheumatoid arthritis: a cross cultural, longitudinal comparison of the Health Assessment Questionnaire and the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale. J Rheumatol 1995, 22(10):1834-1843.
• [58]Chambers LW, Macdonald LA, Tugwell P, Buchanan WW, Kraag G: The McMaster Health Index Questionnaire as a measure of quality of life for patients with rheumatoid disease. J Rheumatol 1982, 9(5):780-784.
• [59]Fitzpatrick R, Ziebland S, Jenkinson C, Mowat A: Importance of sensitivity to change as a criterion for selecting health status measures. Qual Health Care 1992, 1(2):89-93.
• [60]Fitzpatrick R, Ziebland S, Jenkinson C, Mowat A: A generic health status instrument in the assessment of rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 1992, 31(2):87-90.
• [61]Jenkinson C, Fitzpatrick R, Argyle M: The Nottingham Health Profile: an analysis of its sensitivity in differentiating illness groups. Soc Sci Med 1988, 27(12):1411-1414.
• [62]Jenkinson C, Fitzpatrick R: Measurement of health status in patients with chronic illness: comparison of the Nottingham health profile and the general health questionnaire. Fam Pract 1990, 7(2):121-124.
• [63]Houssien DA, Jonsson T, Davies E, Scott DL: Rheumatoid factor isotypes, disease activity and the outcome of rheumatoid arthritis: comparative effects of different antigens. Scand J Rheumatol 1998, 27(1):46-53.
• [64]Birrell FN, Hassell AB, Jones PW, Dawes PT: How does the short form 36 health questionnaire (SF-36) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) relate to RA outcome measures and SF-36 population values? A cross-sectional study. Clin Rheumatol 2000, 19(3):195-199.
• [65]Russell AS, Conner-Spady B, Mintz A, Maksymowych WP: The responsiveness of generic health status measures as assessed in patients with rheumatoid arthritis receiving infliximab. J Rheumatol 2003, 30(5):941-947.
• [66]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(5):723-729.
• [67]Tugwell P, Wells G, Strand V, Maetzel A, Bombardier C, Crawford B, Dorrier C, Thompson A: Clinical improvement as reflected in measures of function and health-related quality of life following treatment with leflunomide compared with methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis: sensitivity and relative efficiency to detect a treatment effect in a twelve-month, placebo-controlled trial. Leflunomide Rheumatoid Arthritis Investigators Group. Arthritis Rheum 2000, 43(3):506-514.
• [68]Kosinski M, Zhao SZ, Dedhiya S, Osterhaus JT, Ware JE Jr: Determining minimally important changes in generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires in clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2000, 43(7):1478-1487.
• [69]Tuttleman M, Pillemer SR, Tilley BC, Fowler SE, Buckley LM, Alarcon GS, Trentham DE, Neuner R, Clegg DO, Leisen JC, et al.: A cross sectional assessment of health status instruments in patients with rheumatoid arthritis participating in a clinical trial. Minocycline in Rheumatoid Arthritis Trial Group. J Rheumatol 1997, 24(10):1910-1915.
• [70]Deyo RA, Inui TS: Toward clinical applications of health status measures: sensitivity of scales to clinically important changes. Health Serv Res 1984, 19(3):275-289.
• [71]Deyo RA, Inui TS, Leininger J, Overman S: Physical and psychosocial function in rheumatoid arthritis. Clinical use of a self-administered health status instrument. Arch Intern Med 1982, 142(5):879-882.
• [72]Deyo RA, Inui TS, Leininger JD, Overman SS: Measuring functional outcomes in chronic disease: a comparison of traditional scales and a self-administered health status questionnaire in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Med Care 1983, 21(2):180-192.
• [73]Baron M, Schieir O, Hudson M, Steele R, Kolahi S, Berkson L, Couture F, Fitzcharles MA, Gagne M, Garfield B, et al.: The clinimetric properties of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II in early inflammatory arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2008, 59(3):382-390.
• [74]Meesters JJ, Verhoef J, Liem IS, Putter H, Vliet Vlieland TP: Validity and responsiveness of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II to assess disability in rheumatoid arthritis patients. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2010, 49(2):326-333.
• [75]Jette AM: Functional Status Index: reliability of a chronic disease evaluation instrument. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1980, 61(9):395-401.
• [76]Lorish CD, Abraham N, Austin JS, Bradley LA, Alarcon GS: A comparison of the full and short versions of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales. Arthritis Care Res 1991, 4(4):168-173.
• [77]Wallston KA, Brown GK, Stein MJ, Dobbins CJ: Comparing the short and long versions of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales. J Rheumatol 1989, 16(8):1105-1109.
• [78]Anderson JJ, Firschein HE, Meenan RF: Sensitivity of a health status measure to short-term clinical changes in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1989, 32(7):844-850.
• [79]Buchbinder R, Bombardier C, Yeung M, Tugwell P: Which outcome measures should be used in rheumatoid arthritis clinical trials? Clinical and quality-of-life measures' responsiveness to treatment in a randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 1995, 38(11):1568-1580.
• [80]Meenan RF, Anderson JJ, Kazis LE, Egger MJ, Altz-Smith M, Samuelson CO Jr, Willkens RF, Solsky MA, Hayes SP, Blocka KL, et al.: Outcome assessment in clinical trials. Evidence for the sensitivity of a health status measure. Arthritis Rheum 1984, 27(12):1344-1352.
• [81]Meenan RF, Gertman PM, Mason JH: Measuring health status in arthritis. The arthritis impact measurement scales. Arthritis Rheum 1980, 23(2):146-152.
• [82]Meenan RF, Mason JH, Anderson JJ, Guccione AA, Kazis LE: AIMS2. The content and properties of a revised and expanded Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales Health Status Questionnaire. Arthritis Rheum 1992, 35(1):1-10.
• [83]Guillemin F, Coste J, Pouchot J, Ghezail M, Bregeon C, Sany J: The AIMS2-SF: a short form of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2. French Quality of Life in Rheumatology Group. Arthritis Rheum 1997, 40(7):1267-1274.
• [84]Weisman MH, Paulus HE, Russak SM, Lubeck DP, Chiou CF, Sengupta N, Ofman JJ, Borenstein J, Moadel AB, Sherbourne CD: Development of a new instrument for rheumatoid arthritis: the Cedars-Sinai Health-Related Quality of Life instrument (CSHQ-RA). Arthritis Rheum 2003, 49(1):78-84.
• [85]Egger MJ, Ward JR, Karg MB, Williams HJ, Reading JC: Reliability and validity of the CSSRD functional assessment survey in rheumatoid arthritis. Cooperative Systematic Studies of Rheumatic Diseases. Arthritis Care Res 1995, 8(1):21-27.
• [86]Zochling J, Stucki G, Grill E, Braun J: A comparative study of patient-reported functional outcomes in acute rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2007, 34(1):64-69.
• [87]Bombardier C, Raboud J: A comparison of health-related quality-of-life measures for rheumatoid arthritis research. The Auranofin Cooperating Group. Control Clin Trials 1991, 12(4 Suppl):243S-256S.
• [88]Fitzpatrick R, Newman S, Lamb R, Shipley M: A comparison of measures of health status in rheumatoid arthritis. Br J Rheumatol 1989, 28(3):201-206.
• [89]Fries JF, Spitz P, Kraines RG, Holman HR: Measurement of patient outcome in arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 1980, 23(2):137-145.
• [90]Greenwood MC, Doyle DV, Ensor M: Does the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire have potential as a monitoring tool for subjects with rheumatoid arthritis? Ann Rheum Dis 2001, 60(4):344-348.
• [91]Pope JE, Khanna D, Norrie D, Ouimet JM: The minimally important difference for the health assessment questionnaire in rheumatoid arthritis clinical practice is smaller than in randomized controlled trials. J Rheumatol 2009, 36(2):254-259.
• [92]Rohekar G, Pope J: Test-retest reliability of patient global assessment and physician global assessment in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 2009, 36(10):2178-2182.
• [93]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(5):982-989.
• [94]Ziebland S, Fitzpatrick R, Jenkinson C, Mowat A: Comparison of two approaches to measuring change in health status in rheumatoid arthritis: the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and modified HAQ. Ann Rheum Dis 1992, 51(11):1202-1205.
• [95]Pincus T, Callahan LF, Brooks RH, Fuchs HA, Olsen NJ, Kaye JJ: Self-report questionnaire scores in rheumatoid arthritis compared with traditional physical, radiographic, and laboratory measures. Ann Intern Med 1989, 110(4):259-266.
• [96]Salaffi F, Bazzichi L, Stancati A, Neri R, Cazzato M, Consensi A, Grassi W, Bombardieri S: Development of a functional disability measurement tool to assess early arthritis: the Recent-Onset Arthritis Disability (ROAD) questionnaire. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005, 23(5):628-636.
• [97]Evers AW, Taal E, Kraaimaat FW, Jacobs JW, Abdel-Nasser A, Rasker JJ, Bijlsma JW: A comparison of two recently developed health status instruments for patients with arthritis: Dutch-AIMS2 and IRGL. Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales. Impact of Rheumatic diseases on General health and Lifestyle. Br J Rheumatol 1998, 37(2):157-164.
• [98]Huskes C, Kraaimaat F, Bijlsma JW: Development of a self-report questionnaire to assess the impact of rheumatic diseases on health and lifestyle. J Rehabil Sci 1990, 3(3):65-70.
• [99]Helewa A, Goldsmith CH, Smythe HA: Independent measurement of functional capacity in rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol 1982, 9(5):794-797.
• [100]Sullivan M, Ahlmen M, Bjelle A, Karlsson J: Health status assessment in rheumatoid arthritis. II. Evaluation of a modified Shorter Sickness Impact Profile. J Rheumatol 1993, 20(9):1500-1507.