Dataset Information

Measuring disability in multiple sclerosis: the WHODAS 2.0.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Reliable measurement of disability in multiple sclerosis (MS) using a comprehensive, patient self-reported scale, such as the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0, would be of clinical and research benefit.

Methods

In the Trajectories of Outcome in Neurological Conditions-MS study, WHODAS 2.0 (WHODAS-36 items for working, WHODAS-32 items if not working, WHODAS-12 items short-form) was examined using Rasch analysis in 5809 people with MS.

Results

The 36- and 32-item parallel forms, and the cognitive and physical domains, showed reliability consistent with individual or group use. The 12-item short-form is valid for group use only. Interval level measurement for parametric statistics can be derived from all three scales which showed medium to strong effect sizes for discrimination across characteristics such as age, subtype, and disease duration. Smallest detectable difference for each scale was < 6 on the standardised metric of 0-100 so < 6% of the total range. There was no substantial differential item functioning (DIF) by age, gender, education, working full/part-time, or disease duration; the finding of no DIF for time or sample supports the use of WHODAS 2.0 for longitudinal studies, with the 36- and 32-item versions and the physical and cognitive domains valid for individual patient follow-up.

Conclusions

Disability in MS can be comprehensively measured at interval level by the WHODAS 2.0, and validly monitored over time. Routine use of this self-reported measure in clinical and research practice would give valuable information on the trajectories of disability of individuals and groups.

SUBMITTER: Young CA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10522513 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measuring disability in multiple sclerosis: the WHODAS 2.0.

Young Carolyn A CA Rog David J DJ Sharrack Basil B Constantinescu Cris C Kalra Seema S Harrower Tim T Langdon Dawn D Tennant Alan A Mills Roger J RJ

Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation 20230817 11

<h4>Introduction</h4>Reliable measurement of disability in multiple sclerosis (MS) using a comprehensive, patient self-reported scale, such as the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0, would be of clinical and research benefit.<h4>Methods</h4>In the Trajectories of Outcome in Neurological Conditions-MS study, WHODAS 2.0 (WHODAS-36 items for working, WHODAS-32 items if not working, WHODAS-12 items short-form) was examined using Rasch analysis in 5809 people with M ...[more]

PMID: 37589773

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) is a generic questionnaire that captures health and disability-related functioning information corresponding to six major life domains: Cognition, Mobility, Self-care, Getting along, Life activities, and Participation. The WHODAS 2.0 is used in a wide range of international clinical and research settings. A psychometric evaluation of WHODAS 2.0, Swedish version, in the general population is lacking, together with national reference data to enable interpretation and comparison. This study aims to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Swedish 36-item version of WHODAS 2.0 and describe the prevalence of disability in a Swedish general population.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was performed. Internal consistency reliability was assessed with Cronbach's alpha. The construct validity was evaluated with item-total correlation, Pearson's correlation between the WHODAS 2.0 domains and the RAND-36 subscales, analysis of known groups by one-way ANOVA, and analysis of the factor structure by confirmatory factor analysis.ResultsThree thousand four hundred and eighty two adults aged 19-103 years (response rate 43%) participated. Significantly higher degrees of disability were reported by the oldest age group (≥ 80 years), adults with a low level of education, and those on sick leave. Cronbach's alpha was from 0.84 to 0.95 for the domain scores and 0.97 for the total score. The item-scale convergent validity was satisfactory, and the item-scale discriminant validity was acceptable except for the item about sexual activity. The data partially supported the factor structure, with borderline fit indices.ConclusionThe psychometric properties of the self-administered Swedish 36-item version of the WHODAS 2.0 are comparable to those of other language versions of the instrument. Data of the prevalence of disability in Swedish general population enables normative comparisons of WHODAS 2.0 scores of individuals and groups within clinical practice. The instrument has certain limitations that could be improved on in a future revision. The test-retest reliability and responsiveness of the Swedish version of WHODAS 2.0 for different somatic patient populations remain to be evaluated.

Project description:Background and objectiveMapping algorithms can be used for estimating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) when studies apply non-preference-based instruments. In this study, we estimate a regression-based algorithm for mapping between the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) and the preference-based instrument SF-6D to obtain preference estimates usable in health economic evaluations. This was done separately for the working and non-working populations, as WHODAS 2.0 discriminates between these groups when estimating scores.MethodsUsing a dataset including 2258 participants from the general Swedish population, we estimated the statistical relationship between SF-6D and WHODAS 2.0. We applied three regression methods, i.e., ordinary least squares (OLS), generalized linear models (GLM), and Tobit, in mapping onto SF-6D from WHODAS 2.0 at the overall-score and domain levels. Root mean squared error (RMSE) and mean absolute error (MAE) were used for validation of the models; R2 was used to assess model fit.ResultsThe best-performing models for both the working and non-working populations were GLM models with RMSE ranging from 0.084 to 0.088, MAE ranging from 0.068 to 0.071, and R2 ranging from 0.503 to 0.608. When mapping from the WHODAS 2.0 overall score, the preferred model also included sex for both the working and non-working populations. When mapping from the WHODAS 2.0 domain level, the preferred model for the working population included the domains mobility, household activities, work/study activities, and sex. For the non-working population, the domain-level model included the domains mobility, household activities, participation, and education.ConclusionsIt is possible to apply the derived mapping algorithms for health economic evaluations in studies using WHODAS 2.0. As conceptual overlap is incomplete, we recommend using the domain-based algorithms over the overall score. Different algorithms must be applied depending on whether the population is working or non-working, due to the characteristics of WHODAS 2.0.

Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 12-item survey (WHODAS-12) is a questionnaire developed by the WHO to measure functioning across health conditions, cultures, and settings. WHODAS-12 consists of a subset of the 36 items of WHODAS-2.0 36-item questionnaire. Little is known about the minimal important difference (MID) of WHODAS-12 in persons with chronic low back pain (LBP), which would be useful to determine whether rehabilitation improves functioning to an extent that is meaningful for people experiencing the condition. Our objective was to estimate an anchor-based MID for WHODAS-12 questionnaire in persons with chronic LBP.MethodsWe analyzed data from two cohort studies (identified in our previous systematic review) conducted in Europe that measured functioning using the WHODAS-36 in adults with chronic LBP. Eligible participants were adults with chronic LBP with scores on another measure as an anchor to indicate participants with small but important changes in functioning over time [Short-form-36 Physical Functioning (SF36-PF) or Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)] at baseline and follow-up (study 1: 3-months post-treatment; study 2: 1-month post-discharge from hospital). WHODAS-12 scores were constructed as sums of the 12 items (scored 0-4), with possible scores ranging from 0 to 48. We calculated the mean WHODAS-12 score in participants who achieved a small but meaningful improvement on SF36-PF or ODI at follow-up. A meaningful improvement was an MID of 4-16 on ODI or 5-16 on SF36-PF.ResultsOf 70 eligible participants in study 1 (mean age = 54.1 years, SD = 14.7; 69% female), 18 achieved a small meaningful improvement based on SF-36 PF. Corresponding mean WHODAS-12 change score was - 3.22/48 (95% CI -4.79 to -1.64). Of 89 eligible participants in study 2 (mean age = 65.5 years, SD = 11.5; 61% female), 50 achieved a small meaningful improvement based on ODI. Corresponding mean WHODAS-12 change score was - 5.99/48 (95% CI - 7.20 to -4.79).ConclusionsUsing an anchor-based approach, the MID of WHODAS-12 is estimated at -3.22 (95% CI -4.79 to -1.64) or -5.99 (95% CI - 7.20 to -4.79) in adults with chronic LBP. These MID values inform the utility of WHODAS-12 in measuring functioning to determine whether rehabilitation or other health services achieve a minimal difference that is meaningful to patients with chronic LBP.

Project description:BackgroundGlobally, the leading cause of years lived with disability is low back pain (LBP). Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is responsible for most of the cost and disability associated with LBP. This is more devastating in low income countries, particularly in rural Nigeria with one of the greatest global burdens of LBP. No Igbo back pain specific measure captures remunerative or non-remunerative work outcomes. Disability measurement using these tools may not fully explain work-related disability and community participation, a limitation not evident in the World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0). This study aimed to cross-culturally adapt the WHODAS 2.0 and validate it in rural and urban Nigerian populations with CLBP.MethodsTranslation, cultural adaptation, test-retest, and cross-sectional psychometric testing was performed. WHODAS 2.0 was forward and back translated by clinical/non-clinical translators. Expert review committee evaluated the translations. Twelve people with CLBP in a rural Nigerian community piloted/pre-tested the questionnaire. Cronbach's alpha assessing internal consistency; intraclass correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman plots assessing test-retest reliability; and minimal detectable change were investigated in a convenience sample of 50 adults with CLBP in rural and urban Nigeria. Construct validity was examined using Spearman's correlation analyses with the back-performance scale, Igbo Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and eleven-point box scale; and exploratory factor analysis in a random sample of 200 adults with CLBP in rural Nigeria. Ceiling and floor effects were investigated in both samples.ResultsPatient instructions were also translated. 'Waist pain/lower back pain' was added to 'illness(es)' to make the measure relevant for this study whilst allowing for future studies involving other conditions. The Igbo phrase for 'family and friends' was used to better represent 'people close to you' in item D4.3. The Igbo-WHODAS had good internal consistency (α = 0.75-0.97); intra class correlation coefficients (ICC = 0.81-0.93); standard error of measurements (5.05-11.10) and minimal detectable change (13.99-30.77). Igbo-WHODAS correlated moderately with performance-based disability, self-reported back pain-specific disability and pain intensity, with a seven-factor structure and no floor and ceiling effects.ConclusionsIgbo-WHODAS appears psychometrically sound. Its research and clinical utility require further testing.

Dataset Information

Measuring disability in multiple sclerosis: the WHODAS 2.0.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Measuring disability in multiple sclerosis: the WHODAS 2.0.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets