Literature DB >> 12592542

The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain.

O Hägg1, P Fritzell, A Nordwall.   

Abstract

When measuring treatment effect in chronic low back pain with multi-item outcome instruments, it is necessary, both for clinical decision-making and research purposes, to understand the clinical importance of the outcome scores. The aims of the present study were three-fold. Firstly, it aimed to estimate the minimal clinically important difference of three multi-item outcome instruments (the Oswestry Disability Index, the General Function Score and the Zung Depression Scale) and of the visual analogue scale (VAS) of back pain. Secondly, it aimed to estimate the error of measurement of these instruments; and its third aim was to describe the clinical meaning of score change. The study population consisted of 289 patients treated surgically or non-surgically in a randomised controlled trial. The minimal clinically important difference was estimated with patient global assessment as the external criterion. It was compared with the standard error of measurement of the instruments. The individual items of the instruments were compared for score changes related to improvement and deterioration. The standard error of measurement of the Oswestry Disability Index, the General Function Score and the Zung Depression Scale was 4, 6 and 3 units, respectively. The 95% tolerance interval was 10, 16 and 8 units, respectively. The minimal clinically important difference was 10, 12 and 8-9 units, respectively, thus not significantly exceeding the tolerance interval. The minimal clinically important difference of VAS back pain was 18-19 units, well exceeding the 95% tolerance interval, which was 15 units. Improvement after treatment for chronic low back pain tends to occur to a greater extent in sleep disturbance, ability to do usual things and psychological irritability, but to a lesser extent in the ability to sit, stand and lift. We conclude that the VAS of back pain is responsive enough to detect the minimal clinically important difference, whereas the smallest acceptable score changes of the Oswestry Disability Index, the General Function Score and the Zung Depression Scale may require an increase to exceed the 95% tolerance interval when used for clinical decision making and for power calculation. Despite improvement after treatment, the ability to sit, stand and lift, remain notable problems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12592542     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-002-0464-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  223 in total

1.  Long-term reduction in pain and disability after surgery with the interspinous device for intervertebral assisted motion (DIAM) spinal stabilization system in patients with low back pain: 4-year follow-up from a longitudinal prospective case series.

Authors:  Josip Buric; Massimiliano Pulidori
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-01-29       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Cross-cultural adaptation and assessment of the reliability and validity of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) for the Brazilian-Portuguese language.

Authors:  L H F Damasceno; P A G Rocha; E S Barbosa; C A M Barros; F T Canto; H L A Defino; A F Mannion
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-12-15       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Responsiveness of the Chinese version of the Oswestry disability index in patients with chronic low back pain.

Authors:  Chao Ma; Shaoling Wu; Lingjun Xiao; Yunlian Xue
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-11-26       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Clinical outcomes of patients with lumbar disc herniation, selected for one-level open-discectomy and microdiscectomy.

Authors:  Kotryna Veresciagina; Bronius Spakauskas; Kazys Vytautas Ambrozaitis
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Clinical outcomes after treatment with disc prostheses in three lumbar segments compared to one- or two segments.

Authors:  Svante Berg; Nina Gillberg-Aronsson
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2015-09-30

6.  Surgical vs nonoperative treatment for lumbar disk herniation: the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) observational cohort.

Authors:  James N Weinstein; Jon D Lurie; Tor D Tosteson; Jonathan S Skinner; Brett Hanscom; Anna N A Tosteson; Harry Herkowitz; Jeffrey Fischgrund; Frank P Cammisa; Todd Albert; Richard A Deyo
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2006-11-22       Impact factor: 56.272

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

Authors:  A F Mannion; A Junge; J C T Fairbank; J Dvorak; D Grob
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-04-26       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Differential patient responses to spinal manipulative therapy and their relation to spinal degeneration and post-treatment changes in disc diffusion.

Authors:  Arnold Y L Wong; Eric C Parent; Sukhvinder S Dhillon; Narasimha Prasad; Dino Samartzis; Gregory N Kawchuk
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Dependence of the minimal clinically important improvement on the baseline value is a consequence of floor and ceiling effects and not different expectations by patients.

Authors:  Michael M Ward; Lori C Guthrie; Maria Alba
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2014-02-17       Impact factor: 6.437

10.  The quality of spine surgery from the patient's perspective: part 2. Minimal clinically important difference for improvement and deterioration as measured with the Core Outcome Measures Index.

Authors:  A F Mannion; F Porchet; F S Kleinstück; F Lattig; D Jeszenszky; V Bartanusz; J Dvorak; D Grob
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-03-19       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.