You are here

  • Home
  • Archive
  • Volume 60, Issue 9
  • Responsiveness of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index as compared with the SF-36 in patients with osteoarthritis of the legs undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation intervention

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Extended report
Responsiveness of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index as compared with the SF-36 in patients with osteoarthritis of the legs undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation intervention
  1. F Angsta,
  2. A Aeschlimanna,
  3. W Steinerb,
  4. G Stuckic
  1. aClinic of Rheumatology and Rehabilitation Zurzach, Switzerland, bDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation of the University of Zurich, Switzerland, cDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation of the University of Munich, Germany
  1. Dr F Angst, Schiedhaldenstrasse 1, CH-8700 Küsnacht, Switzerlandfangst{at}datacomm.ch

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To compare the responsiveness of the condition-specific Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis (OA) index (WOMAC) and the generic Short Form-36 (SF-36) in patients with OA of the legs undergoing a comprehensive inpatient rehabilitation intervention.

METHODS A prospective follow up study of consecutively referred inpatients of a rehabilitation clinic was made. The patients included fulfilled the American College of Rheumatology criteria for knee or hip OA and underwent both passive and, particularly, active physical therapy for three to four weeks. Responsiveness assessment was performed using the standardised response mean (SRM), effect size, and Guyatt's responsiveness statistic between admission and discharge (end of rehabilitation) and then again between admission and three months later. For pain and function the SRMs were stratified by sex and OA joint. Effects were tested by the t test and SRMs of different scales were compared by the jack knife test.

RESULTS At the three month follow up, complete data were obtained for 223 patients. In general, the three responsiveness statistics showed a similar order of responsiveness. For both instruments, the pain scales were more responsive than the function scales. The responsiveness of the pain scale of both instruments was comparable (SRM=0.723 for WOMAC and SRM=0.528 for SF-36 at the end of rehabilitation; SRM=0.377 for WOMAC and SRM=0.468 for SF-36 at the three month follow up). In the measurement of function, the WOMAC was significantly more responsive than the SF-36 (SRMs, end of rehabilitation: 0.628v 0.249; three month follow up: 0.235v −0.001). Responsiveness tended to be higher in women and in knee OA than in men and hip OA.

CONCLUSIONS Both instruments, the WOMAC and the SF-36, capture improvement in pain in patients undergoing comprehensive inpatient rehabilitation intervention. Functional improvement can be detected better by the WOMAC than by the SF-36. All the other scales of both instruments were more weakly responsive.

  • responsiveness
  • rehabilitation
  • WOMAC
  • SF-36

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    View Full Text