Detailled Information

Name of the Instrument/Tool Osteoporosis-Targeted Quality of Life (OPTQoL)
First Description

Lydick E, Zimmerman SI, Yawn B, Love B, Kleerekoper M, Ross P, et al. Development and validation of a discriminative quality of life questionnaire for osteoporosis (the OPTQoL). Journal of bone and mineral research. 1997;12(3):456-63.

Year 1997
Domains
Concept of constructs Health related quality of life
Population/Disease Disease specific
Originally developed for Osteoporosis (OP)
Other rheumatic diseases
where can be applied (only if validated)
---
Additional population with no rheumatic diseases No
Language: Originally published in English
Available in Language Dutch, French, German, Italian, Spanish
REFERENCE IDENTIFICATION
Author/s Lydick E, Zimmerman SI, Yawn B, Love B, Kleerekoper M, Ross P, et al.
Title Development and validation of a discriminative quality of life questionnaire for osteoporosis (the OPTQol).
Journal J Bone Miner Res
Year 1997
Vol 12
Num 3
Pages 456-63
Country US
Language English
Other references of interest
No other References.
Instrument/Tool Translations References
No other References.
DEVELOPER CONTACT INFORMATION
Correspondence to ---
E-Mail ---
Address ---
Website ---
Available ---
Links ---
DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTRUMENT
Type Of Measure Questionnaire
Brief Description

assessment of the impact of osteoporosis on quality of life among women living in community. There are three domains: physical difficulty, adaptations and fears.

Number of Items 36
Range 0-100
Responses options/scale No
Developed for Both
PRACTICAL APPLICATION
Method of administration Self-administered
Recommendations to score

Scores were calculated by summing individual responses on items with each domain. Each item of same domain received equal weighting. Domains scores were adjusted to a scale 0-100  

Score Interpretation Higher values reflect worse scores.
Cut-off points ---
Cut-off points applied to ---
Smallest detectable change if described ---
Smallest detectable change applied to ---
Completion time by the patient 0 minutes
Scoring time by the assessor 0 minutes
Training to score Not necessary
Strengths Useful in clinical practice & research
Limitations Lengthy
OTHER COMMENTS
Other Comments ---