Cited by 242Spondyloarthritis Studies and TreatmentsHealth Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of LifeMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation

Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire in ankylosing spondylitis

Open access
Reilly, Margaret C., Gooch, Katherine L., Wong, Robert L., Kupper, Hartmut, van der Heijde, Désirée·2010·Rheumatology

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the validity, reliability and responsiveness of the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire in AS (WPAI:SpA). METHODS: Baseline and Week-24 data from a randomized, double-blind study of adalimumab in patients with AS were used. Discriminative validity of WPAI:SpA absenteeism, presenteeism, overall work productivity loss and activity impairment scores was assessed relative to patient-reported outcomes: Bath AS Disease Activity Index (BASDAI), AS Quality of Life Questionnaire (ASQOL), Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36), Physical and Mental Component Summaries (PCS and MCS, respectively) and Health Utilities Index Mark 3 (HUI-3). Responsiveness of the WPAI:SpA instrument was assessed for patients meeting the minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) for ASQOL and BASDAI (i.e. quality of life and clinical responders, respectively) and quantified with standardized response mean (SRM) calculations. RESULTS: Of 315 patients, 205 were employed at baseline. Patients with more severe AS (BASDAI > median) showed significantly greater impairment in work and daily activities than patients with lesser disease severity (P < 0.001). This trend was consistent for ASQOL, SF-36 PCS, SF-36 MCS and HUI-3. There were significant differences in WPAI:SpA scores for patients achieving BASDAI clinical response and ASQOL quality of life response vs non-responders. For responders, SRMs were large for work presenteeism, overall work impairment and activity impairment (-0.86 to -1.29 for BASDAI; -0.89 to -1.18 for ASQOL) and small for absenteeism (-0.25 for BASDAI; -0.31 for ASQOL). CONCLUSIONS: The WPAI:SpA is a valid, reliable and responsive tool for assessing work productivity for patients with AS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/home, NCT00085644.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/rheumatology/kep457

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Braun J, Bollow M, Remlinger G et al. Prevalence of spondyloarthropathies in HLA-B27 positive and negative blood donors. Arthritis Rheum 1998;41:58-67.
  2. Ward MM. Functional disability predicts total costs in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Arthritis Rheum 2002; 46:223-31.
  3. Davis JC, Revicki D, van der Heijde DMF et al. Health-related quality of life outcomes in patients with active ankylosing spondylitis treated with adalimumab: results from a randomized controlled study. Arthritis Rheum 2007;57:1050-7.
  4. Reynolds S, Doward LC, Spoorenberg A et al. The development of the ankylosing spondylitis quality of life questionnaire. Qual Life Res 1999;8:651.
  5. Ware JE, Kosinski M. SF-36 physical and mental health summary scales: a manual for users of version 1. 2nd edition. Lincoln, RI: Quality Metric Incorporated, 2001.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Reilly, M. C., Gooch, K. L., Wong, R. L., Kupper, H., & van der Heijde, D.
Affiliations
Leiden University Medical Center (NL)
Venue
Rheumatology
Published
2010-01-25
Volume
49
Issue
4
Pages
812-819
ISSN
  • 1462-0324 (ISSN-L)
  • 1462-0332
OpenAlex
W2157825261
Cited by
242
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 2
FWCI
6.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
public-domain
Locations
  • Lara D. Veeken (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Leiden Repository (Leiden University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Abbott Laboratories
  • Amgen
  • Pfizer
  • AstraZeneca
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rheumatology › Spondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Keywords
Work Productivity and Activity Impairment, ankylosing spondylitis, labor productivity, absenteeism, presenteeism, activity impairment, adalimumab, assessment validity, reliability statistics, responsiveness, minimal clinically important difference, standardized response mean, Bath AS Disease Activity Index, SF-36
MeSH terms
Absenteeism, Adalimumab, Activities of Daily Living, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Efficiency, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires, Severity of Illness Index, Spondylitis, Ankylosing, Statistics as Topic, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review