High rates of depressive symptoms among patients with systemic sclerosis are not explained by differential reporting of somatic symptoms

OBJECTIVE: Between 36% and 65% of patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc) report symptoms of depression above cutoff thresholds on self-report questionnaires. The objective of this study was to assess whether these high rates result from differential reporting of somatic symptoms related to the high physical burden of SSc. METHODS: Symptom profiles reported on the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) were compared between a multicenter sample of 403 patients with SSc and a sample of respondents to an Internet depression survey, matched on total CES-D score, age, race/ethnicity, and sex. An exact nonparametric generalized Mantel-Haenszel procedure was used to identify differential item functioning between groups. RESULTS: Patients with SSc reported significantly higher frequencies (moderate to large effect size; P < 0.01) on 4 CES-D somatic symptom items: bothered, appetite, effort, and sleep. Internet respondents had higher item scores on 2 items that assessed interpersonal difficulties (unfriendly, large effect size; P < 0.01; disliked, large effect size; P < 0.01) and on 2 items that assessed lack of positive effect (happy, moderate effect size; P = 0.01; enjoy, large effect size; P < 0.01). Adjustment of standard CES-D cutoff criteria for potential bias due to somatic symptom reporting resulted in a reduction of only 3.6% in the number of SSc patients with significant symptoms of depression. CONCLUSION: High rates of depressive symptoms in SSc are not due to bias related to the report of somatic symptoms. The pattern of differential item functioning between the SSc and Internet groups, however, suggests some qualitative differences in depressive symptom presentation.     

Association of hospital and surgeon volume of total hip replacement with functional status and satisfaction three years following surgery

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether hospital volume and surgeon volume of total hip replacements (THRs) are associated with patient-reported functional status and satisfaction with surgery 3 years postoperatively. METHODS: We performed a population-based cohort study of a stratified random sample of Medicare beneficiaries who underwent elective primary or revision THR in Ohio, Pennsylvania, or Colorado in 1995. The primary outcomes were the self-reported Harris hip score and a validated scale measuring satisfaction with the results of surgery. Both outcomes were assessed 3 years postoperatively. Hospital volume was defined as the aggregate number of elective primary and revision THRs performed on Medicare beneficiaries in the hospital in 1995. High-volume hospitals were defined as those in which >100 such procedures are performed annually, and low-volume centers were defined as those in which 12 procedures per year. CONCLUSION: Hospital volume and surgeon volume have little effect on 3-year functional outcome following THR, after adjusting for patient sociodemographic and select clinical characteristics. However, satisfaction with primary THR is greater among patients who underwent surgery in high-volume centers, and satisfaction with revisions is greater among patients whose operations were performed by higher-volume surgeons. Referring clinicians should incorporate these findings into their discussion of referral choices with patients considering THR. Conclusions regarding the effect of volume on longevity of the implants must await longer-term followup studies. Finally, further research is warranted to better understand the association between hospital and surgeon procedure volume and patient satisfaction with surgery.     

The clinimetric properties of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II in early inflammatory arthritis

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinimetric properties of a new health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instrument, the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHODAS II), in patients with early inflammatory arthritis. METHODS: Internal consistency as well as criterion, construct, and discriminative validity of the WHODAS II were assessed in 172 patients with early inflammatory arthritis who completed the WHODAS II, the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36), and other measures of disease severity, functioning, pain, depression, and resource use. Test-retest reliability of the WHODAS II was assessed by having a subset of 20 patients complete the WHODAS II a second time, 1 week after the first assessment. RESULTS: The WHODAS II had high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.96 for patients working or in school and 0.93 for patients not working or in school). Test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients of the WHODAS II total score and subscales ranged from 0.82-0.96. The WHODAS II total score was strongly correlated with the SF-36 physical component score (Kendall's tau-b 0.51, P < 0.001) and moderately correlated with the SF-36 mental component score (tau-b 0.43, P < 0.001). WHODAS II correlations with disease outcomes ranged from Kendall's tau-b 0.15-0.55. The WHODAS II significantly differentiated between every aspect of disease severity assessed with the exception of measures of health resource use. CONCLUSION: The WHODAS II is a valid and reliable measure of HRQOL in cross-sectional studies of patients with early inflammatory arthritis. Research is still required to investigate potential item redundancy and determine its usefulness in longitudinal studies.