Condition-specific outcome measures for low back pain

Müller, Urs; Duetz, Margreet; Roeder, C.; Greenough, C G

doi:10.1007/s00586-003-0665-1

Cited by 60 publications

(67 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Effective scientific evaluation governed by reliable scientific principles is essential. 18,19 Thus, we fully agree with those [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27] who recommend the use of multiple means of measurement that respect cultural, social, and personal differences present in the patients that we propose to evaluate, and it is in this manner that we developed this prospective study.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Evolução psicossomática e clínica de pacientes com estenose do canal lombar operados com sistema interespinhoso

Consciência

2013

Coluna/Columna

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The goal of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of interspinous spacers in degenerative lumbar disease and the evolution of patient's depression status and somatization preexisting symptoms. Methods: 20 patients with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis were evaluated. Considering the different inclusion criteria, patients agreed to participate in the study by signing the written consent form. For clinical and psychosomatic assessment we used Euroqol Score (EQ-5D) for lumbar spine and lower limbs, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS); Oswestry Disability Index version 2.0 and Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire (MSPQ); and Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (ZDS). Statistical analysis was performed using Friedman and Wilcoxon tests, with significance level of 0.05. Results: There was an improvement in EQ-5D (p<0.001), VAS for lumbar spine and lower limbs (p<0.001), ODI (p<0.001), without significant changes in MSPQ (p=0.197). Conclusion: In patients with degenerative lumbar disease (Benzel grade 2, 3 and Pfirmann grade 3, 4) and stable in psychosomatic terms, the use of interspinous spacers proved effective clinical progression and improved the rate of depression related to the pre-existing pathology.Keywords: Spine; Quality of live; Depression; Orthopaedic fixation devices; Lumbar vertebrae/surgery. RESUMO Objetivo: Procuramos avaliar a eficácia terapêutica de estabilizadores interespinosos na doença degenerativa lombar, e a evolução do

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 77%

Evolução psicossomática e clínica de pacientes com estenose do canal lombar operados com sistema interespinhoso

Consciência

2013

Coluna/Columna

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ICC reported in the present study for the German ODI was higher than those reported in previous studies, even though many of the latter used shorter test-retest intervals (median 4 days, ICC=0.91 [29]; 1 week, 0.83 [22], 0.94 [15]; 2 days, 0.88 [23], 2 weeks, 0.94 [26]; 4 weeks, 0.90 [21], 6 weeks, 0.84 [11]). The weighted j values for the individual questions were moderate to very good, ranging from 0.59 (for the ''lifting'' question) to 0.85 (for ''walking''); no j values for the ODI have previously been reported in the literature for comparison [32]. Although the j values reported in the present study indicate that some of the individual questions could be used reliably in sub-analyses, as done in previous studies [12], the questionnaire was originally intended only to provide a sum-score for disability.…”

Section: Construct Validity Of the Odimentioning

confidence: 77%

Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 1: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient-orientated assessment methods are of paramount importance in the evaluation of treatment outcome. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is one of the condition-specific questionnaires recommended for use with back pain patients. To date, no German version has been published in the peerreviewed literature. A cross-cultural adaptation of the ODI for the German language was carried out, according to established guidelines. One hundred patients with chronic low-back pain (35 conservative, 65 surgical) completed a questionnaire booklet containing the newly translated ODI, along with a 0-10 pain visual analogue scale (VAS), the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, and Likert scales for disability, medication intake and pain frequency [to assess ODI's construct (convergent) validity]. Thirty-nine of these patients completed a second questionnaire within 2 weeks (to assess test-retest reliability). The intraclass correlation coefficient for the test-retest reliability of the questionnaire was 0.96. In test-retest, 74% of the individual questions were answered identically, and 21% just one grade higher or lower. The standard error of measurement (SEM) was 3.4, giving a ''minimum detectable change'' (MDC 95% ) for the ODI of approximately 9 points, i.e. the minimum change in an individual's score required to be considered ''real change'' (with 95% confidence) over and above measurement error. The ODI scores correlated with VAS pain intensity (r=0.78, P<0.001) and Roland Morris scores (r=0.80, P<0.001). The mean baseline ODI scores differed significantly between the surgical and conservative patients (P<0.001), and between the different categories of the Likert scales for disability, medication use and pain frequency (in each case P<0.001). Our German version of the Oswestry questionnaire is reliable and valid, and shows psychometric characteristics as good as, if not better than, the original English version. It should represent a valuable tool for use in future patient-orientated outcome studies in German-speaking lands.

show abstract

“…Subjects completed the ODI (version 2.1a) and the QDS as condition-specific PROMs, the general construct of which have been published previously several times [11,40]. The total score of both PROMs were converted to rate of disability in percentage using the proportional recalculation method.…”

Section: Measurement Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several different PROMs, measuring spine-related disability, have been developed and published [3,11]. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) [12,13] and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QDS) [14,15] are two reliable, valid and widely used PROMs in spine care that have been validated for use with numerous languages since first being reported in English.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability and validity study on the Hungarian versions of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) are widely used in spine care. The development of reliable and valid National versions of spine-related disability questionnaires is strongly recommended from both the clinical and scientific points-of-view. The aims of this study were to adapt and validate the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QDS) for use with the Hungarian language. Methods After translating and culturally adapting the ODI and QDS, 133 patients with lumbar degenerative spinal disorder filled in the questionnaire booklet twice within 2 weeks. Subjects completed the Hungarian versions of the two PROMs as well as the WHOQoL-BREF validated as a general life quality questionnaire and Visual Analogue Scale of pain. Internal consistency, reliability and construct validity of the questionnaires were determined, as were the standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC) scores. Results The Hungarian ODI consisted of one factor that showed good internal consistency (Cronbach-a 0.890). The QDS showed a four-factor structure with Cronbach-a values between 0.788 and 0.917. No significant floor or ceiling effects were observed. The test-retest analysis showed excellent reliability of the Hungarian ODI and QDS. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) were 0.927 and 0.923, respectively. SEM values of 4.8 and 5.2 resulted in a MDC of 13 and 14 points in the Hungarian ODI and QDS, respectively. The correlation coefficient (r) between pain and ODI was 0.680 (p \ 0.001) and the correlation between the ODI and the physical subscale of WHOQoL was also very good (r = -0.705, p \ 0.001). The QDS total score and its four subscales correlated significantly with pain and with the physical subscale of WHOQoL (r [ 0.4, p \ 0.001). The level of disability measured by the Hungarian ODI and QDS was significantly higher in the surgical subgroup than in non-surgically treated patients (p \ 0.001). Conclusions Translation and cultural adaptation of the ODI and QDS were successful. Hungarian versions of the ODI and QDS proved to be reliable, valid PROMs confirming that they can be used in future clinical and scientific work with Hungarian-speaking spine patients.

show abstract

Condition-specific outcome measures for low back pain

Cited by 60 publications

References 60 publications

Evolução psicossomática e clínica de pacientes com estenose do canal lombar operados com sistema interespinhoso

Evolução psicossomática e clínica de pacientes com estenose do canal lombar operados com sistema interespinhoso

Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 1: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity

Reliability and validity study on the Hungarian versions of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About