Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The SIP68: An abbreviated sickness impact profile for disability outcomes research

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) is one of the most widely recognized generic health status instruments, but its length has often left it out of consideration for outcomes research. We assess a short alternative, the Sickness Impact Profile 68 (SIP68), for retest and proxy reliability, validity, and scaling properties, in a population of adults with disability (PWD). For convergent validity, the SIP68 was compared to the instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), activities of daily living (ADLs) and the short-form 36 (SF-36). We completed 398 interviews with PWD, 131 index–proxy sets, and 40 retests. Retest intraclass correlations were above 0.75 for all scales and dimensions except the physical dimension (0.61). Proxy reliability ranged from 0.26 (psychological autonomy and communication) to 0.85 (somatic autonomy). Correlation between the SIP68 and SIP was 0.94 overall; between the SIP68 and similar scales of the SF-36 correlations was moderate, and highest for physical health scales. We repeated the SIP68 development factor analysis and reproduced a structure of the full SIP that included 65 of SIP68 items. However, 36 additional items were retained that are not part of the SIP68. Overall, the SIP68 shows promise for use as a disability outcomes tool.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, Gilson BS. The Sickness Impact Profile: Development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 1981; 19: 787–805.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bendtsen P, Hornquist JO. Severity of rheumatoid arthritis, function and quality of life: Sub-group comparisons. Clin Exp Rheum 1993; 11(5): 495–502.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Deyo RA, Inui TS, Leininger J, Overman S. Physical and psychosocial function in rheumatoid arthritis. Clinical use of a self-administered health status instrument. Arch Intern Med 1982; 142(5): 879–882.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Deyo RA, Inui TS, Leininger JD, Overman SS. Measuring functional outcomes in chronic disease: A comparison of 593 traditional scales and a self-administered health status questionnaire in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Med Care 1983; 21(2): 180–192.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Katz JN, Larson MG, Phillips CB, Fossel AH, Liang MH. Comparative measurement sensitivity of short and longer health status instruments. Med Care 1992; 30(10): 917–925.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Sullivan M, Ahlmen M, Archenholtz B, Svensson G. Measuring health in rheumatic disorders by means of a Swedish version of the Sickness Impact Profile. Results from a population study.Scand J Rheum 1986; 15(2): 193–200.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Weinberger M, Samsa GP, Tierney WM, Belyea MJ, Hiner SL. Generic versus disease specific health status measures: Comparing the Sickness Impact Profile and the Arthritis Impact Measurement scales. J Rheum 1992; 19(4): 543–546.

    Google Scholar 

  8. De Haan R, Horn J, Limburg M, Van Der Meulen J, Bossuyt P. A comparison of five stroke scales with measures of disability, handicap, and quality of life. Stroke 1993; 24(8): 1178–1181.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Granger CV, Cotter AC, Hamilton BB, Fiedler RC. Functional assessment scales: A study of persons after stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1993; 74(2): 133–138.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nydevik I, Hulter Asberg K. Subjective dysfunction after stroke. A study with the Sickness Impact Profile. Scand J Prim Health Care 1991; 9(4): 271–275.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nydevik I, Hulter-Asberg K. Sickness impact after stroke. A 3-year follow-up. Scand J Prim Health Care 1992; 10(4): 284–289.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Schuling J, Greidanus J, Meyboom-de Jong B. Measuring functional status of stroke patients with the Sickness Impact Profile. Disabil Rehabil 1993; 15(1): 19–23.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Butcher JL, MacKenzie EJ, Cushing B, et al. Long-term outcomes after lower extremity trauma. J Trauma 1996; 41(1): 4–9.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Greive AC, Lankhorst GJ. Functional outcome of lowerlimb amputees: A prospective descriptive study in a general hospital. Prosthet Orthot Int 1996; 20(2): 79–87.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lundqvist C, Siosteen A, Sullivan L, Blomstrand C, Lind B, Sullivan M. Spinal cord injuries: A shortened measure of function and mood. Spinal Cord 1997; 35(1): 17–21.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Munster AM, Fauerbach JA, Lawrence J. Development and utilization of a psychometric instrument for measuring quality of life in burn patients, 1976 to 1996. Acta Chir Plast 1996; 38(4): 128–131.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Schanke AK. Psychological distress, social support and coping behaviour among polio survivors: A 5-year perspective on 63 polio patients. Disabil Rehabil 1997; 19(3): 108–116.

    Google Scholar 

  18. van Balen HG, Mulder T, Keyser A. Towards a disabilityoriented epidemiology of traumatic brain injury. Disabil Rehabil 1996; 18(4): 181–190.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Elliott TR, Herrick SM, Witty TE, et al. Social relationships and psychosocial impairment of persons with spinal cord injury. Psychol Health 1992a; 7(1): 55–67.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Elliott TR, Herrick SM, Witty TE, Godshall F, Spruell M. Social support and depression following spinal cord injury. Rehabil Psychol 1992b; 37(1): 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  21. de Bruin AF, Diederiks JPM, de Witte LP, Stevens FCJ, Philipsen H. The development of a short generic version of the Sickness Impact Profile. J Clin Epidemiol 1994a; 47: 407–418.

    Google Scholar 

  22. de Bruin AF, Buys M, de Witte LP, Diederiks JPM. The Sickness Impact Profile: SIP68, a short generic version, first evaluation of the reliability and reproducibility. J Clin Epidemiol 1994b; 47: 863–871.

    Google Scholar 

  23. de Bruin AF, Diederiks JPM, de Witte LP, Stevens FCJ, Philipsen H. Assessing the responsiveness of a functional status measure: The Sickness Impact Profile versus the SIP68. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 529–549.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Post MWM, de Bruin A, de Witte L, Schrijvers A. The SIP68: A measure of health-related functional status in rehabilitation medicine. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1996; 77: 440–445.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Post MWM, van Asbeck FWA, van Dijk AJ, Schrijvers AJP. Services for spinal cord injured: Availability and satisfaction. Spinal Cord 1997; 35: 109–115.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Andresen EM. Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000; 81(Suppl 2): S15–S20.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Andresen EM, Vahle VJ, Lollar D. Proxy reliability: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures for people with disability. Qual Life Res 2001; 10: 609–619.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Nelson LM, Longstreth WTJ, Koepsell TD, et al. Proxy respondents in epidmiologic research. Epidemiol Rev 1990; 12: 71–86.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Rothman ML, Hedrick SC, Bulcroft KA, et al. The validity of proxy-generated scores as measures of patient health status. Med Care 1991; 29(2): 115–124.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Magaziner J, Simonsick EM, Kashner TM, et al. Patientproxy response comparability on measures of patient health and functional status. J Clin Epidemiol 1988; 41(11): 1065–1074.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Epstein AM, Hall JA, Tognetti J, et al. Using proxies to evaluate quality of life. Can they provide valid information about patients' health status and satisficaion with medical care? Med Care 1989; 27(Suppl 3): S91–S98.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Sneeuw KCA, Aaronson NK, Sprangers MA, et al. Comparison of patient and proxy EORTC QLQ-C30 ratings in assessing the quality of life of cancer patients. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51(7): 617–631.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sneeuw KCA, Aaronson NK, Sprangers MA, et al. Value of caregiver ratings in evaluating the quality of life of patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15(3): 1206–1217.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sneeuw KC, Aaronson NK, Osoba D, et al. The use of significant others as proxy raters of the quality of life of patients with brain cancer. Med Care 1997; 35(5): 490–506.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Spangers MA, Aaronson NK. The role of health care providers and significant others in evaluating the quality of life of patients with chronic disease: A review. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45(7): 743–760.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Rothman ML, Hedrick SC, Bulcroft KA, et al. The validity of proxy-generated scores as measures of patient health status. Med Care 1991; 29(2): 115–124.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Lawton MP, Brody EM. Assessment of older people: Selfmaintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 1969; 9: 179–185.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Lawton MP. Scales to measure competence in everyday activities. Psychopharmacol Bull 1988; 24: 609–614.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lawton MP, Moss M, Fulcomer M, Kleban MH. A research and service-oriented multilevel assessment instrument. J Gerontol 1982; 37: 91–99.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Katz S. Assessing the self-maintenance: Activities of daily living, mobility, and instrumental activities of daily living. J Am Geriatr Soc 1983; 31: 721–727.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30: 473–483.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Andresen EM, Fouts BS, Romeis JC, Brownson CA. Performance of health-related quality-of-life instruments in a spinal cord injured population. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80: 877–884.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Nanda U, Andresen EM. Performance of measures of health-related quality of life and function among disabled adults (abstract). Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 644.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Prysak GM, Andresen EM, Meyers AM. Prevalence of secondary conditions in veterans with spinal cord injury and their interference with life activities. Topics Spinal Cord Injury 2000; 6(1): 34–42.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Meyers AR, Bisbee A, Winter M. The 'Boston model' of managed care and spinal cord injury: A cross-sectional study of the outcomes of risk-based, prepaid, managed care. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1999; 80(11): 1450–1456.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Meyers AR, Mitra M, Klein-Walker D, Wilber D, Allen D. Predictors of secondary conditions in a sample of independently-living adults with high-level spinal cord injury. Topics Spinal Cord Injury (Secondary Conditions) 2000; 6(1): 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Sawtooth Software. Ci3 2.0.12c. Sequim, WA: Sawtooth Software, Inc. 1985-1996.

  48. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B. The SF-36 health survey: Manual and interpretation guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Meyers AR, Andresen EM. Enabling our instruments: Accommodation, universal design, and assured access to participation in research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2000; 81 (Suppl 2): S5–S9.

    Google Scholar 

  50. SPSS Advanced Statistics, Release 9.0. Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc., 1998.

  51. Andresen EM, Rothenberg BM, Kaplan RM. Performance of a self-administered version of the quality of well-being (QWB-SA) questionnaire among older adults. Med Care 1998; 36: 1349–1360.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Fleiss JL. The Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Community Health, Saint Louis University School of Public Health, Salus Center, 3545 Lafayette Ave. Suite 300, St Louis, MO, 63104, USA

    Upasana Nanda, Patricia M. McLendon, Elena M. Andresen & Eric Armbrecht

Authors
  1. Upasana Nanda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patricia M. McLendon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elena M. Andresen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Eric Armbrecht
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nanda, U., McLendon, P.M., Andresen, E.M. et al. The SIP68: An abbreviated sickness impact profile for disability outcomes research. Qual Life Res 12, 583–595 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025036325886

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025036325886

Search

Navigation