You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Matters arising
Comparison of WOMAC with SF-36 for OA of the knee or hip
  1. J G Jones1,
  2. F Leighton1
  1. 1Queen Elizabeth Hospital, PO Box 1342, Whakaue Street, Rotorua, New Zealand

    https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.61.2.182-a

    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.

      Angst et al compared WOMAC with the SF-36 as tools to assess the outcome of a three to four week inpatient rehabilitation programme for people with osteoarthritis of the knee or hip.1 They concluded that both instruments capture improvement in pain levels, but functional improvement can be better detected by WOMAC. We have reservations about the use of SF-36 in this context.

      We too provide residential musculoskeletal rehabilitation of usually three weeks' duration and have been searching for a suitable instrument to assess quality of life at the time of discharge from our programme. We have rejected the SF-36 for the following reasons.

      A large majority of the questions in the SF-36 relate to the subject's experience over the past four weeks. The condition of most of our patients improves considerably over the three weeks of treatment. It is therefore not appropriate to ask how they have been over the previous four weeks. We note that the period of treatment in the report by Angst et al varies from three to four weeks.

      It is not only the length of time which makes the use of …

      View Full Text