Sickness Impact Profile (SIP): Difference between revisions
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
== Method of Use == | == Method of Use == | ||
SIP is a paper and pencil generic based designed questionnaire to evaluate broad measure of health status, which evaluates a test taker health status based on their responses to the items on the questionnaire. The time to complete the SIP test ranges from 20 to 30 minutes<ref>Clarke AE, Panopalis P. 4 [https://books.google.com.ng/books?hl=en&lr=&id=SzMe55m-0lkC&oi=fnd&pg=PA32&dq=n+E.+Clarke+MD,+MSc,+Pantelis+Panopalis+MD,+in+Systemic+Lupus+Erythematosus,+2007%0D%0ASickness+Impact+Profile%0D%0A%0D%0AThe+Sickness+Impact+Profile+(SIP)16+aims+to+asses+the+i Quality of Life and Economic Aspects. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus E-Book: A Companion to Rheumatology.] 2007 Jan 1:32.</ref> and the major domain on this tool are physical and psychosocial domain. It has 12 categories including sleep and rest, eating, work, home management, recreation and pastimes, ambulation, mobility, body care and movement, social interaction, alertness behavior, emotional behavior, and communication<ref>Thornton DR, Argoff CE. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780323046213/cognitive-and-perceptual-rehabilitation PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSTRUCTS AND TREATMENT INTERVENTIONS. Pain Management Secrets E-Book.] 2009 Jul 31:328.</ref>. The tool has 136 items with yes or no response from test taker, see Figure 1. | SIP is a paper and pencil generic based designed questionnaire to evaluate broad measure of health status, which evaluates a test taker health status based on their responses to the items on the questionnaire. The time to complete the SIP test ranges from 20 to 30 minutes<ref>Clarke AE, Panopalis P. 4 [https://books.google.com.ng/books?hl=en&lr=&id=SzMe55m-0lkC&oi=fnd&pg=PA32&dq=n+E.+Clarke+MD,+MSc,+Pantelis+Panopalis+MD,+in+Systemic+Lupus+Erythematosus,+2007%0D%0ASickness+Impact+Profile%0D%0A%0D%0AThe+Sickness+Impact+Profile+(SIP)16+aims+to+asses+the+i Quality of Life and Economic Aspects. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus E-Book: A Companion to Rheumatology.] 2007 Jan 1:32.</ref> and the major domain on this tool are physical and psychosocial domain. It has 12 categories including sleep and rest, eating, work, home management, recreation and pastimes, ambulation, mobility, body care and movement, social interaction, alertness behavior, emotional behavior, and communication<ref>Thornton DR, Argoff CE. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780323046213/cognitive-and-perceptual-rehabilitation PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSTRUCTS AND TREATMENT INTERVENTIONS. Pain Management Secrets E-Book.] 2009 Jul 31:328.</ref>. The tool has 136 items with yes or no response from test taker, see Figure 1. The total maximum score from this test is 100% with a zero represents a good health status without physical or behavioural changes from the illness while the 100 represents poor health status or large impact of sickness on behavior<ref name=":1">Carr A. Ad[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/art.11414 ult measures of quality of life: The Arthritis impact measurement scales (AIMS/AIMS2), disease repercussion Profile (DRP), EuroQoL, Nottingham health Profile (NHP), patient generated index (PGI), quality of well‐being scale (QWB), RAQoL, short form‐36 (SF‐36), sickness impact Profile (SIP), SIP‐RA, and World Health Organization's quality of life instruments (WHOQoL, WHOQoL‐100, WHOQoL‐Bref).] Arthritis Care & Research: Official Journal of the American College of Rheumatology. 2003 Oct 15;49(S5):S113-33.</ref>. | ||
[[File:SIP.png|thumb|Figure 1]] | [[File:SIP.png|thumb|Figure 1]] | ||
== Evidence == | == Evidence among older adults == | ||
=== Reliability === | === SIP Validity and Reliability === | ||
The Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) is pschometric properties is not well established in the literature. However, Rothman et al .,<ref name=":2">Rothman ML, Hedrick S, Inui T. T[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2493537/ he Sickness Impact Profile as a measure of the health status of noncognitively impaired nursing home residents. Medical care]. 1989 Mar 1:S157-67.</ref> noted that SIP is a valid and reliable tool among nursing home residents and it has a comprehensive assessment of physical function. However, the data on the relaibility and validity of Rothman et al.,<ref name=":2" /> is not freely accessible for referencing, Another study shown that this tool | |||
=== | === Reliability. === | ||
<section> | |||
In a review paper by Car<ref name=":1" />, the review revealed that SIP has has a good internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha range of 0.91 to 0.95 for overall score, 0.84–0.93 for the 2 subscales, and 0.60–0.90 for the 12 categories. The author also reported a test‐retest correlations between the 2 administrations range from 0.88 to 0.92 for the overall score. Alos, the review revealed a test‐retest correlation for interviewer‐administered version was 0.97 and 0.87 for the self‐completed version, respectively. The interrater reliability (between raters Kappa) was 0.87. | |||
</section> | |||
=== | === Validity. === | ||
<section><section> | |||
For general population Car<ref name=":1" /> review showed SIP has a good concurent validity when SIP was used to evaluate patient health status compare with AIMS performance. There are strong correlations between SIP and AIMS (0.83) and AIMS2 (0.73). SIP has a good construct validity when its Individual items and subscales correlated with other measures (e.g., Katz's Index of Activities of Daily Living, the Barthel Index, Carroll Rating Scale for Depression, and the Geriatric Depression Scale.) | |||
</section></section> | |||
=== | === Responsiveness/sensitivity to change. === | ||
<section> | |||
In general population SIP has been reported to have good responsivenes amng rheumatoid athrities patients and some other musculoskeletal conditions | |||
</section> <span style="font-size: 20px; font-weight: normal;" class="Apple-style-span"></span> | |||
== Links == | == Links == | ||
Revision as of 18:53, 23 May 2020
Original Editor - Tolulope Adeniji
Top Contributors - Tolulope Adeniji, Kim Jackson and Uchechukwu Chukwuemeka
Objective[edit | edit source]
The Sickness Impact Profile(SIP), a behaviorally based measure of health status, is used to evaluate a person with disease perceived health status. And it is sensitive enough to monitor changes in health status over time or between groups[1]. SIP measures health status, a patient dysfunction through his everyday behaviour, in relation to his diseases condition. Also, it is used to evaluate effect of diseases on physical and emotional functioning. SIP aids in evaluating outcome of an health care services that can be used for a program evaluation, planning and policy formulation[1][2].
Intended Population[edit | edit source]
SIP is a generic measure questionnaires that can used to evaluate a wide range of conditions and populations[3]. This paper will elucidates on its usage and psychometric properties among the older adults population.
Method of Use[edit | edit source]
SIP is a paper and pencil generic based designed questionnaire to evaluate broad measure of health status, which evaluates a test taker health status based on their responses to the items on the questionnaire. The time to complete the SIP test ranges from 20 to 30 minutes[4] and the major domain on this tool are physical and psychosocial domain. It has 12 categories including sleep and rest, eating, work, home management, recreation and pastimes, ambulation, mobility, body care and movement, social interaction, alertness behavior, emotional behavior, and communication[5]. The tool has 136 items with yes or no response from test taker, see Figure 1. The total maximum score from this test is 100% with a zero represents a good health status without physical or behavioural changes from the illness while the 100 represents poor health status or large impact of sickness on behavior[6].
Evidence among older adults[edit | edit source]
SIP Validity and Reliability[edit | edit source]
The Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) is pschometric properties is not well established in the literature. However, Rothman et al .,[7] noted that SIP is a valid and reliable tool among nursing home residents and it has a comprehensive assessment of physical function. However, the data on the relaibility and validity of Rothman et al.,[7] is not freely accessible for referencing, Another study shown that this tool
Reliability.[edit | edit source]
<section> In a review paper by Car[6], the review revealed that SIP has has a good internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha range of 0.91 to 0.95 for overall score, 0.84–0.93 for the 2 subscales, and 0.60–0.90 for the 12 categories. The author also reported a test‐retest correlations between the 2 administrations range from 0.88 to 0.92 for the overall score. Alos, the review revealed a test‐retest correlation for interviewer‐administered version was 0.97 and 0.87 for the self‐completed version, respectively. The interrater reliability (between raters Kappa) was 0.87. </section>
Validity.[edit | edit source]
<section><section> For general population Car[6] review showed SIP has a good concurent validity when SIP was used to evaluate patient health status compare with AIMS performance. There are strong correlations between SIP and AIMS (0.83) and AIMS2 (0.73). SIP has a good construct validity when its Individual items and subscales correlated with other measures (e.g., Katz's Index of Activities of Daily Living, the Barthel Index, Carroll Rating Scale for Depression, and the Geriatric Depression Scale.) </section></section>
Responsiveness/sensitivity to change.[edit | edit source]
<section> In general population SIP has been reported to have good responsivenes amng rheumatoid athrities patients and some other musculoskeletal conditions </section>
Links[edit | edit source]
References[edit | edit source]
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, Gilson BS. The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Medical care. 1981 Aug 1:787-805.
- ↑ Prcic A, Aganovic D, Hadziosmanovic O. Sickness Impact Profile (SIP) Score, a good alternative instrument for measuring quality of life in patients with ileal urinary diversions. Acta Informatica Medica. 2013;21(3):160.
- ↑ Smelser NJ, Baltes PB, editors. International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2001 Nov 1.
- ↑ Clarke AE, Panopalis P. 4 Quality of Life and Economic Aspects. Systemic Lupus Erythematosus E-Book: A Companion to Rheumatology. 2007 Jan 1:32.
- ↑ Thornton DR, Argoff CE. PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSTRUCTS AND TREATMENT INTERVENTIONS. Pain Management Secrets E-Book. 2009 Jul 31:328.
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 Carr A. Adult measures of quality of life: The Arthritis impact measurement scales (AIMS/AIMS2), disease repercussion Profile (DRP), EuroQoL, Nottingham health Profile (NHP), patient generated index (PGI), quality of well‐being scale (QWB), RAQoL, short form‐36 (SF‐36), sickness impact Profile (SIP), SIP‐RA, and World Health Organization's quality of life instruments (WHOQoL, WHOQoL‐100, WHOQoL‐Bref). Arthritis Care & Research: Official Journal of the American College of Rheumatology. 2003 Oct 15;49(S5):S113-33.
- ↑ 7.0 7.1 Rothman ML, Hedrick S, Inui T. The Sickness Impact Profile as a measure of the health status of noncognitively impaired nursing home residents. Medical care. 1989 Mar 1:S157-67.
