Literature DB >> 17413477

Evaluation of the core outcome measure in whiplash.

Trudy J Rebbeck1, Kathryn M Refshauge, Christopher G Maher, Mark Stewart.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Reanalysis of data derived from longitudinal cohort studies.
OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively evaluate the psychometric properties of a 5-item version of the Core Outcome Measure in people with whiplash. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The 7-item Core Outcome Measure was initially proposed as a brief health outcome measure for use in low back pain. To date, this measure has not been comprehensively assessed in a whiplash population. METHOD.: Data were sourced from 3 separate whiplash cohorts (total 481) encompassing acute, early chronic, and late-chronic whiplash among primary care and insurance populations. Subjects completed a 5-item version of the Core Outcome Measure for whiplash (Core Whiplash Outcome Measure [CWOM]), the Functional Rating Index, Neck Disability Index, SF-36, and perceived recovery questionnaires at baseline and short and long-term follow-up periods. Psychometric evaluation of the CWOM included assessing questionnaire responses, internal consistency, construct validity, and internal and external responsiveness.
RESULTS: Internal consistency was excellent at all stages of whiplash (Cronbach alpha = 0.76 in the acute stage and 0.83 in the late-chronic stage). Convergent validity was observed between the CWOM and Functional Rating Index (Pearson r = 0.81), Neck Disability Index (Pearson r = 0.76), and SF-36 physical health summary measure (Pearson r = -0.65). Divergent validity was observed between the CWOM and SF-36 mental health summary measure (Pearson r = -0.45). The internal and external responsiveness of the CWOM was similar to other neck-specific outcome measures.
CONCLUSIONS: We recommend the 5-item CWOM as a brief clinical measure for whiplash because it is quick to administer and score, and has excellent measurement properties. The CWOM may need to be supplemented with other questionnaires (e.g., when assessment of psychological or emotional health is required).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17413477     DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000257595.75367.52

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


  9 in total

1.  Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Multiple Linear Regression of the Neck Disability Index: Assessment If Subscales Are Equally Relevant in Whiplash and Nonspecific Neck Pain.

Authors:  Arthur C Croft; Bryce Milam; Jade Meylor; Richard Manning
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2016-05-25

2.  Classifying Whiplash Recovery Status Using the Neck Disability Index: Optimized Cutoff Points Derived From Receiver Operating Characteristic.

Authors:  Arthur C Croft; Julie A Workman; Michael P Szatalowicz; Philip E Roberts; Leonard R Suiter
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2016-05-26

3.  Global rating of change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design.

Authors:  Steven J Kamper; Christopher G Maher; Grant Mackay
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2009

Review 4.  Measurement properties of disease-specific questionnaires in patients with neck pain: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jasper M Schellingerhout; Arianne P Verhagen; Martijn W Heymans; Bart W Koes; Henrica C de Vet; Caroline B Terwee
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2011-07-07       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  What does 'recovery' mean to people with neck pain? Results of a descriptive thematic analysis.

Authors:  David M Walton; Joy C Macdermid; Todd Taylor
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2013-09-20

6.  Urdu version of the neck disability index: a reliability and validity study.

Authors:  Muhammad Nazim Farooq; Mohammad A Mohseni-Bandpei; Syed Amir Gilani; Ambreen Hafeez
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-04-08       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  Responsiveness of Minimal Clinically Important Change for the Persian Functional Rating Index in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain.

Authors:  Noureddin Nakhostin Ansari; Shiva Komesh; Soofia Naghdi; Zahra Fakhari; Parisa Alaei
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2018-10-18

8.  Research priorities for non-pharmacological therapies for common musculoskeletal problems: nationally and internationally agreed recommendations.

Authors:  Nadine E Foster; Krysia S Dziedzic; Danielle A W M van der Windt; Julie M Fritz; Elaine M Hay
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2009-01-09       Impact factor: 2.362

9.  Psychometric characteristics of the Spanish version of instruments to measure neck pain disability.

Authors:  Francisco M Kovacs; Joan Bagó; Ana Royuela; Jesús Seco; Sergio Giménez; Alfonso Muriel; Víctor Abraira; José Luis Martín; José Luis Peña; Mario Gestoso; Nicole Mufraggi; Montserrat Núñez; Josep Corcoll; Ignacio Gómez-Ochoa; Ma José Ramírez; Eva Calvo; Ma Dolores Castillo; David Martí; Salvador Fuster; Carmen Fernández; Nuria Gimeno; Alejandro Carballo; Alvaro Milán; Dolores Vázquez; Montserrat Cañellas; Ricardo Blanco; Pilar Brieva; Ma Trinidad Rueda; Luis Alvarez; María Teresa Gil Del Real; Joaquín Ayerbe; Luis González; Leovigildo Ginel; Mariano Ortega; Miryam Bernal; Gonzalo Bolado; Anna Vidal; Ana Ausín; Domingo Ramón; María Antonia Mir; Miquel Tomás; Javier Zamora; Alejandra Cano
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2008-04-09       Impact factor: 2.362

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.