Literature DB >> 16582856

Responsiveness of objective, disease-specific, and generic outcome measures in patients with chronic low back pain: an assessment for improving, stable, and deteriorating patients.

Helen Campbell1, Oliver Rivero-Arias, Katharine Johnston, Alastair Gray, Jeremy Fairbank, Helen Frost.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Analysis of outcome data collected prospectively from 250 patients recruited to the UK Spine Stabilization Trial.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the responsiveness of the Shuttle Walking Test (SWT), which is an objective outcome measure, with that of a disease-specific (the Oswestry Disability Index) and 2 generic (the EQ-5D and SF-36) instruments in patients with chronic low back pain (LBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Studies assessing the performance of subjective disease-specific and generic measures have increased in recent years, although there is a paucity of research reporting the responsiveness of objective measures in patients with LBP. The focus of investigation has been on responsiveness to improvements in LBP symptoms. For patients with deteriorating health, it remains largely unclear how outcome instruments perform.
METHODS: Baseline and 12-month outcome data collected on 250 patients with chronic LBP recruited to the Spine Stabilization Trial were analyzed using traditional measures of responsiveness. Analyses were performed for 3 groups of patients: those who rated their health status as improved, deteriorated, and stable at 12 months.
RESULTS: The SWT was shown by all measures to be responsive to health improvement, although less so than other instruments. All instruments were able to detect small-to-moderate reductions in health. Instrument floor effects may be responsible for small SF-36 change scores recorded for deteriorating patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Although shown to be responsive, including the SWT alongside disease-specific and generic instruments is unlikely to add additional information. All instruments appear responsive to patient deterioration, however, further research for the SF-36 is required.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16582856     DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000207257.64215.03

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  15 in total

1.  Level of Evidence for Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of Physical Capacity Tasks Designed to Assess Functioning in Patients With Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review Using the COSMIN Standards.

Authors:  Max Jakobsson; Annelie Gutke; Lidwine B Mokkink; Rob Smeets; Mari Lundberg
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2019-04-01

2.  Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Disablement in the Physically Active Scale and Preliminary Testing of Short-Form Versions: A Calibration and Validation Study.

Authors:  Russell T Baker; Damon Burton; Michael A Pickering; Amanda Start
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2019-02-11       Impact factor: 2.860

Review 3.  Can The EQ-5D Detect Meaningful Change? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Nalin Payakachat; Mir M Ali; J Mick Tilford
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Feasibility, comparability, and reliability of the standard gamble compared with the rating scale and time trade-off techniques in Korean population.

Authors:  Seon-Ha Kim; Sang-Il Lee; Min-Woo Jo
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-08-11       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Improving gambling survey research using dual-frame sampling of landline and mobile phone numbers.

Authors:  Alun C Jackson; Darren Pennay; Nicki A Dowling; Bernadette Coles-Janess; Darren R Christensen
Journal:  J Gambl Stud       Date:  2014-06

6.  Comparing the psychometric properties of the EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L in cancer patients in Korea.

Authors:  Seon Ha Kim; Hwa Jung Kim; Sang-Il Lee; Min-Woo Jo
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-09-23       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) is a responsive instrument for assessing the outcome of treatment for adult spinal deformity.

Authors:  A F Mannion; A Vila-Casademunt; M Domingo-Sàbat; S Wunderlin; F Pellisé; J Bago; E Acaroglu; A Alanay; F S Pérez-Grueso; I Obeid; F S Kleinstück
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-10-30       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Validity and responsiveness of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) for the neck.

Authors:  C D Fankhauser; U Mutter; E Aghayev; A F Mannion
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-08-20       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  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

10.  Negative beliefs and psychological disturbance in spine surgery patients: a cause or consequence of a poor treatment outcome?

Authors:  S Havakeshian; A F Mannion
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-05-23       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.