Abstract
The SF 36 questionnaire has been validated and used in multiple studies. However, it remains unclear how well patients complete the SF-36 questionnaire in a spinal outpatient clinic setting outside the context of a study. We aim to assess the quality of information gained if the SF 36 is used as an audit and outcome measure in real clinical practice.
The SF 36 has been used in our clinic as a routine for the initial assessment and outcome audit of patients for the last 4 years. A prospective, consecutive sample of 85 patients’ SF-36 forms was evaluated during a spinal out-patient clinic over one month at our teaching hospital. Completeness of data entry was assessed. All patients had access to a translator and clinic nurse to help complete the questionnaire if needed.
There were 34 males and 51 females (age range 16 to 81, average 48). Thirty seven patients were White British, 22 other and 26 undisclosed ethnicities. Thirty eight (45%) forms were complete leaving 47 (55%) which had at least one question unanswered or spoiled. Of these, two had five to ten errors, one had 10 to 15 errors, four had 15 to 20 errors, seven had 20 to 25 errors, ten had 25 to 30 errors and 17 had 30 to 35 errors. In addition six forms were entirely incomplete beyond patient identifier information. White British patients had fewer errors (average 4) compared to other (9) and unknown (9) ethnicities.
Outside the context of a research study, the SF-36 questionnaire in an urban teaching hospital spinal outpatient clinic is not a reliable tool. Redesign of the questionnaire may be required. The SF-36 questionnaire is less well completed by patients declared as non White British, even with the facility for a clinic nurse and a translator.
Correspondence should be addressed to Editorial Secretary Mr ML Costa or Assistant Editorial Secretary Mr B.J. Ollivere at BOA, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PE, England; Email: mattcosta@hotmail.com or ben@ollivere.co.uk
