Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison of Short Form-36 and Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire in patients with migraine.
Clin J Pain. 2006 Jul-Aug; 22(6):564-8.CJ

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaires are two of the most commonly used tools to measure outcomes in people suffering from headaches. Nevertheless, little is known about their interrelationship in patients with headache.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the interrelationship between SF-36 and MIDAS questionnaires in patients with migraine.

METHODS

We enrolled 231 patients with migraine (male/female: 43/188, mean age 35.3+/-8.1) who visited our headache clinic. They completed the SF-36, MIDAS, and a headache intake form.

RESULTS

The correlation coefficients between the MIDAS score and 8 domains of the SF-36 ranged from -0.30 for the mental health domain to -0.53 for the social functioning domain (P<0.01). Canonical correlation analysis showed that the overall overlap between the 2 instruments was moderately strong (canonical correlation coefficients r=0.707 and 0.572). The overall measured redundancies for MIDAS and SF-36 scales in this study were 35.4% and 11.5%, respectively. The stepwise linear regression model showed that the social functioning domain alone explained 27.9% of variance in the MIDAS scores. Bodily pain, physical functioning, and general health domains added an additional 11.4% of the explained variance in the regression model.

CONCLUSION

Despite the fact that these two measures were considerably correlated, the MIDAS and SF-36 were found to measure different aspects of the impact of headache for the sample investigated. The MIDAS questionnaire does not cover the emotional domain; therefore, an accompanying psychological questionnaire might help assess the outcome for headache studies.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Neurological Institute, Taipei Veterans General Hospital and Department of Neurology, National Yang-Ming University School of Medicine, Taipei, Taiwan.No affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

16788344

Citation

Fuh, Jong-Ling, and Shuu-Jiun Wang. "Comparison of Short Form-36 and Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire in Patients With Migraine." The Clinical Journal of Pain, vol. 22, no. 6, 2006, pp. 564-8.
Fuh JL, Wang SJ. Comparison of Short Form-36 and Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire in patients with migraine. Clin J Pain. 2006;22(6):564-8.
Fuh, J. L., & Wang, S. J. (2006). Comparison of Short Form-36 and Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire in patients with migraine. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 22(6), 564-8.
Fuh JL, Wang SJ. Comparison of Short Form-36 and Migraine Disability Assessment Questionnaire in Patients With Migraine. Clin J Pain. 2006 Jul-Aug;22(6):564-8. PubMed PMID: 16788344.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of Short Form-36 and Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire in patients with migraine. AU - Fuh,Jong-Ling, AU - Wang,Shuu-Jiun, PY - 2006/6/22/pubmed PY - 2006/8/26/medline PY - 2006/6/22/entrez SP - 564 EP - 8 JF - The Clinical journal of pain JO - Clin J Pain VL - 22 IS - 6 N2 - BACKGROUND: The Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaires are two of the most commonly used tools to measure outcomes in people suffering from headaches. Nevertheless, little is known about their interrelationship in patients with headache. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the interrelationship between SF-36 and MIDAS questionnaires in patients with migraine. METHODS: We enrolled 231 patients with migraine (male/female: 43/188, mean age 35.3+/-8.1) who visited our headache clinic. They completed the SF-36, MIDAS, and a headache intake form. RESULTS: The correlation coefficients between the MIDAS score and 8 domains of the SF-36 ranged from -0.30 for the mental health domain to -0.53 for the social functioning domain (P<0.01). Canonical correlation analysis showed that the overall overlap between the 2 instruments was moderately strong (canonical correlation coefficients r=0.707 and 0.572). The overall measured redundancies for MIDAS and SF-36 scales in this study were 35.4% and 11.5%, respectively. The stepwise linear regression model showed that the social functioning domain alone explained 27.9% of variance in the MIDAS scores. Bodily pain, physical functioning, and general health domains added an additional 11.4% of the explained variance in the regression model. CONCLUSION: Despite the fact that these two measures were considerably correlated, the MIDAS and SF-36 were found to measure different aspects of the impact of headache for the sample investigated. The MIDAS questionnaire does not cover the emotional domain; therefore, an accompanying psychological questionnaire might help assess the outcome for headache studies. SN - 0749-8047 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/16788344/Comparison_of_Short_Form_36_and_Migraine_Disability_Assessment_questionnaire_in_patients_with_migraine_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ajp.0000208908.50130.9b DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -