The DASH , the  Michigan H and Outcomes Question naire ( MHQ ) , the  Patient Evaluation Measure ( PEM ) , and the  Patient-Reported Wrist Evaluation ( PRWE ) had evidence supporting their reliability , validity , and responsiveness .
A post-hoc review of excluded studies revealed the AUSCAN Osteoarthritis H and Index as another suitable instrument that had favourable reliability , validity , and responsiveness .
The DASH , MHQ , and AUSCAN Osteoarthritis H and Index instruments were supported by the most favourable empirical evidence for validity , reliability , and responsiveness .
The PEM and PRWE also had favourable empirical evidence reported for these elements .
This paper aim ed to identify condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures used in clinical trials among people with wrist osteoarthritis and summarise empirical peer- review ed evidence supporting their reliability , validity , and responsiveness to change .
Using the SF-36 and Euroqol on an elderly population
An important method ological issue in measuring health-related quality of life is whether instruments such as SF-36 and EQ can be used on an elderly population . This paper aims to test the completion , reliability and validity of the SF-36 and Euroqol on an elderly female population , and to compare them with the OPCS Disability Survey .  Three hundred and eighty women aged 75 and over participated in a r and omized controlled trial of the use of clodronate provided the sample . As part of the trial , patients were asked to complete the  UK SF-36 and Euroqol  , and the OPCS disability survey instrument  administered by interview in a hospital clinic at baseline . A r and om sub sample of respondents were retested six months later . The SF-36 achieved poorer levels of completion by dimension ( 68.1%–88.9 % ) than the OPCS ( 99.2 % ) and Euroqol ( 84%–93.5 % ) instruments . There were no major floor effects in the distribution of scores , except for the role dimensions of SF-36 . Correlation between test-retest were significant for all instruments , but lower for the role dimensions and social functioning of SF-36 , and these dimensions also had 95 % Cls for the mean differences in excess of 10 points . There was substantial agreement between the three instruments , and evidence for their construct validity against age and recent use of health services . The sensitivities of the instruments were tested through hypothetical changes in health status . There was some evidence of greater sensitivity to lower levels of morbidity in the SF-36 . Where brevity is required and the health changes are expected to be substantial , then EQ may be sufficient . For greater sensitivity SF-36 seems to have an advantage , however lower completion rates and problems with consistency suggest it requires adaptation . One solution would be to use interviewer administration . Another would be to change the SF-36 to make it more suitable for use in elderly people , although this may reduce its usefulness as a generic instrument
The DASH , the  Michigan H and Outcomes Question naire ( MHQ ) , the  Patient Evaluation Measure ( PEM ) , and the  Patient-Reported Wrist Evaluation ( PRWE ) had evidence supporting their reliability , validity , and responsiveness .
A post-hoc review of excluded studies revealed the AUSCAN Osteoarthritis H and Index as another suitable instrument that had favourable reliability , validity , and responsiveness .
The DASH , MHQ , and AUSCAN Osteoarthritis H and Index instruments were supported by the most favourable empirical evidence for validity , reliability , and responsiveness .
The PEM and PRWE also had favourable empirical evidence reported for these elements .
This paper aim ed to identify condition-specific patient-reported outcome measures used in clinical trials among people with wrist osteoarthritis and summarise empirical peer- review ed evidence supporting their reliability , validity , and responsiveness to change .