C Sarasqueta1, O Gabaldon, I Iza, F Béland, P M Paz. 1. Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Hospital Donostia, Apdo Correos 477, 20.080 Donostia, Spain. csaras@chdo.osakidetza.net
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate validity, reliability, responsiveness and practicality of the NASS-AAOS (North American Spine Society--American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons) questionnaire in patients with low back pain. METHODS: The sample included 70 patients with herniated disk, stenosis, chronic low back pain of unknown etiology or acute low back pain. They were assessed twice before treatment (test--retest) and a third measure six months to one year afterwards. RESULTS: The mean time of administration was 24 and 20 min for the test and post-treatment evaluation, respectively. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was between 0.78 and 0.92 on the baseline test and 0.90 or higher on the post-treatment evaluation. The test--retest reproducibility was 0.95 (0.91--0.98) for 'neurological symptoms', 0.82 (0.63--0.91) for 'pain/disability' and 0.63 (0.25--0.82) for 'expectations'. The associations with other measures and clinical criteria were generally moderate to high and in the expected direction. The effect size for 'pain/disability' in combination with 'neurological symptoms' was 2.02 for patients who improved versus an effect of -0.09 in patients who were stable between test and retest; the area under the curve on this joint scale was 0.81 (0.69--0.90). CONCLUSIONS: The instrument is valid, sensitive to clinical changes and reliable for comparisons between groups, but further study is needed for its application in monitoring individual patients.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate validity, reliability, responsiveness and practicality of the NASS-AAOS (North American Spine Society--American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons) questionnaire in patients with low back pain. METHODS: The sample included 70 patients with herniated disk, stenosis, chronic low back pain of unknown etiology or acute low back pain. They were assessed twice before treatment (test--retest) and a third measure six months to one year afterwards. RESULTS: The mean time of administration was 24 and 20 min for the test and post-treatment evaluation, respectively. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was between 0.78 and 0.92 on the baseline test and 0.90 or higher on the post-treatment evaluation. The test--retest reproducibility was 0.95 (0.91--0.98) for 'neurological symptoms', 0.82 (0.63--0.91) for 'pain/disability' and 0.63 (0.25--0.82) for 'expectations'. The associations with other measures and clinical criteria were generally moderate to high and in the expected direction. The effect size for 'pain/disability' in combination with 'neurological symptoms' was 2.02 for patients who improved versus an effect of -0.09 in patients who were stable between test and retest; the area under the curve on this joint scale was 0.81 (0.69--0.90). CONCLUSIONS: The instrument is valid, sensitive to clinical changes and reliable for comparisons between groups, but further study is needed for its application in monitoring individual patients.
Authors: Francisco M Kovacs; Joan Llobera; María Teresa Gil Del Real; Victor Abraira; Mario Gestoso; Carmen Fernández; Kovacs-Atención Primaria Group Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2002-03-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: G Vilà-Canet; A Covaro; A García de Frutos; M T Ubierna; S Rodríguez-Alabau; S Mojal; E Cáceres Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Ahmed Reda Aldahshory; Hazem Mashaly; Shafik Tahseen El Molla; Ibrahim Abdelmohsen Ismaiel; Khaled Saoud Journal: Asian J Neurosurg Date: 2020-05-29
Authors: Javier Rodríguez-Vela; Antonio Lobo-Escolar; Eduardo Joven; Javier Muñoz-Marín; Antonio Herrera; José Velilla Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2013-06-14 Impact factor: 3.134