Quality of Well-Being in Older People With Osteoarthritis ERIK J. GROESSL, 1 ROBERT M. KAPLAN, 1 AND TERRY A. CRONAN 2 Objective. To examine the sensitivity of the Quality of Well-Being Scale (QWB) as a measure of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in people with osteoarthritis (OA). Methods. The QWB was administered, along with the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale (AIMS) and other health measures. Health care utilization data were also obtained. Results. People with OA had a mean QWB score of 0.643. The QWB scores were significantly correlated with total AIMS scores, self-rated health status, health care costs, depression scores, and most AIMS subscales. In addition, changes in QWB scores after 1 year were significantly correlated with changes in total AIMS scores and some AIMS subscales. Conclusion. The QWB appears to be a useful and sensitive generic, utility-based measure of HRQOL in people with OA. KEY WORDS. Osteoarthritis; Quality of life; Quality of Well-Being Scale; Outcomes measurement; Health assessment. INTRODUCTION Arthritis is the most frequently occurring chronic condi- tion among older Americans, affecting 49% of those older than 65 years (1). Osteoarthritis (OA) has been shown to affect the health status of older persons on 3 primary dimensions: physical disability, psychological disability, and pain (2). Social support and social activity are also affected by arthritis (3,4). The Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale (AIMS) is a widely used, disease-specific measure that addresses the multiple impacts of arthritis severity (5,6). The AIMS is composed of 11 subscales relating to symptoms and func- tional impairment associated with arthritis. Although the AIMS may be a sensitive measure of arthritis symptom- atology, it does not provide a scaled score that can be easily used in cost-effectiveness analysis. Therefore, many researchers recommend using both a generic and a disease- specific measure (7,8). The Quality of Well-Being Scale (QWB) is a comprehen- sive, generic measure of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) that combines information about symptoms and functioning into a single-scaled score that is independent of diagnosis. This independence is useful for comparing quality of life across illnesses, treatments, and popula- tions. The QWB is linked to the concept of quality-ad- justed life years (QALYs). QALYs combine quality and quantity of life into a single index that adjusts survival time for reduced life quality. The cost of an intervention or treatment can be divided by the number of QALYs lost to a particular health condition or produced by an interven- tion to estimate the cost/QALY. This value can then be directly compared among different options that compete for health care resources. The present study examines the sensitivity of a generic outcome measure (QWB) for assessing HRQOL in people with OA. Although the QWB has been validated as a general measure of HRQOL with several other specific diseases, its sensitivity has not been validated in people with OA. This article also provides an estimate of the impact of OA on HRQOL. SUBJECTS AND METHODS Subjects. Members of a Southern California health maintenance organization (HMO) agreed to participate in an intervention testing the effects of social support and education on health and health care utilization. The re- sults of the intervention aspects of the study are reported elsewhere (9 –12). To be eligible, HMO members needed a diagnosis of OA, which was defined as self-reported chronic pain and stiffness and being told by a physician Supported by NIH grants AR-40423, AR-44020, and P60- AR-40770 and AHCPR grant 5R01-HS-09170. 1 Erik J. Groessl, PhD, Robert M. Kaplan, PhD: University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California; 2 Terry A. Cronan, PhD: San Diego State University, San Diego, Cali- fornia. Address correspondence to Erik J. Groessl, UCSD— Health Outcomes Assessment Program, 9500 Gilman Drive, Mail Code 0994, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0994. E-mail: egroessl@popmail.ucsd.edu. Submitted for publication April 17, 2001; accepted in revised form March 23, 2002. Arthritis & Rheumatism (Arthritis Care & Research) Vol. 49, No. 1, February 15, 2003, pp 23–28 DOI 10.1002/art.10903 © 2003, American College of Rheumatology ORIGINAL ARTICLE 23