Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Jun 30:55:jrm4493.
doi: 10.2340/jrm.v55.4493.

Assessment by proxy of the SF-36 and WHO-DAS 2.0. A systematic review

Juan David Hernández  1 , María Alejandra Spir  2 , Kelly Payares  1 , Ana Maria Posada  1 , Fabio Alonso Salinas  1 , Héctor Iván Garcia  1 , Luz H Lugo-Agudelo  1
Affiliations

Assessment by proxy of the SF-36 and WHO-DAS 2.0. A systematic review

Juan David Hernández et al. J Rehabil Med. .

Abstract

Background and objective: In some cases, for the evaluation of the health status of patients it is not possible to obtain data directly from the patient. The objective of this study was to determine if the instruments that cannot be applied to the patient can be completed by a proxy.

Methods: A systematic review of the literature was carried out and 20 studies were included. The instruments reviewed in this synthesis were: Short Form-36 (SF-36), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), WHODAS 2.0, Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ-9), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), Disability Rating Scale (DRS).

Results: The levels of agreement between the responses of the patients and the proxies were good, mainly when evaluating HRQoL and functioning with the SF-36 and WHODAS 2.0 instruments, respectively, with a higher level of agreement in the more objective and observable domains such as physical functioning and lower level of agreement in less objective domains, such as emotional or affective status, and self-perception.

Conclusion: In patients who cannot complete the different instruments, the use of a proxy can help avoid the omission of responses.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest and have received no funding for this study.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the literature search and selection of articles. SF-36: Short Form-36; WHO-DAS 2.0: World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0; PHQ-9: Patient Health Questionnaire 9.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Elliott D, Lazarus R, Leeder SR. Proxy respondents reliably assessed the quality of life of elective cardiac surgery patients. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59: 153–159. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.06.010. - DOI - PubMed
    1. 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. DOI: 10.1023/a:101318790359 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pierre U, Wood-Dauphinee S, Korner-Bitensky N, Gayton D, Hanley J. Proxy use of the Canadian SF-36 in rating health status of the disabled elderly. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51: 983–990. DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(98)00090-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Yip JY, Wilber KH, Myrtle RC, Grazman DN. Comparison of older adult subject and proxy responses on the SF-36 health-related quality of life instrument. Aging Ment Health 2001; 5: 136–142. DOI: 10.1080/13607860120038357. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rooney AG, McNamara S, Mackinnon M, Fraser M, Rampling R, Carson A, et al. . Screening for major depressive disorder in adults with glioma using the PHQ-9: a comparison of patient versus proxy reports. J Neurooncol 2013; 113: 49–55. DOI: 10.1007/s11060-013-1088-4. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types