Literature DB >> 19319578

The quality of spine surgery from the patient's perspective. Part 1: the Core Outcome Measures Index in clinical practice.

Anne F Mannion1, F Porchet, F S Kleinstück, F Lattig, D Jeszenszky, V Bartanusz, J Dvorak, D Grob.   

Abstract

The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) is a short, multidimensional outcome instrument, with excellent psychometric properties, that has been recommended for use in monitoring the outcome of spinal surgery from the patient's perspective. This study examined the feasibility of implementation of COMI and its performance in clinical practice within a large Spine Centre. Beginning in March 2004, all patients undergoing spine surgery in our Spine Centre (1,000-1,200 patients/year) were asked to complete the COMI before and 3, 12 and 24 months after surgery. The COMI has one question each on back (neck) pain intensity, leg/buttock (arm/shoulder) pain intensity, function, symptom-specific well being, general quality of life, work disability and social disability, scored as a 0-10 index. At follow-up, patients also rated the global effectiveness of surgery, and their satisfaction with their treatment in the hospital, on a five-point Likert scale. After some fine-tuning of the method of administration, completion rates for the pre-op COMI improved from 78% in the first year of operation to 92% in subsequent years (non-response was mainly due to emergencies or language or age issues). Effective completion rates at 3, 12 and 24-month follow-up were 94, 92 and 88%, respectively. The 12-month global outcomes (from N = 3,056 patients) were operation helped a lot, 1,417 (46.4%); helped, 860 (28.1%); helped only little, 454 (14.9%); did not help, 272 (8.9%); made things worse, 53 (1.7%). The mean reductions in COMI score for each of these categories were 5.4 (SD2.5); 3.1 (SD2.2); 1.3 (SD1.7); 0.5 (SD2.2) and -0.7 (SD2.2), respectively, yielding respective standardised response mean values ("effect sizes") for each outcome category of 2.2, 1.4, 0.8, 0.2 and 0.3, respectively. The questionnaire was feasible to implement on a prospective basis in routine practice, and was as responsive as many longer spine outcome questionnaires. The shortness of the COMI and its multidimensional nature make it an attractive option to comprehensively assess all patients within a given Spine Centre and hence avoid selection bias in reporting outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19319578      PMCID: PMC2899316          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-009-0942-8

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


  17 in total

Review 1.  Lessons learned searching for a HRQoL instrument to assess the results of treatment in persons with lumbar disorders.

Authors:  G Zanoli; B Strömqvist; R Padua; E Romanini
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management?: A prospective 10-year study.

Authors:  T Amundsen; H Weber; H J Nordal; B Magnaes; M Abdelnoor; F Lilleâs
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 3.  Outcome measures for low back pain research. A proposal for standardized use.

Authors:  R A Deyo; M Battie; A J Beurskens; C Bombardier; P Croft; B Koes; A Malmivaara; M Roland; M Von Korff; G Waddell
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-09-15       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  The core outcomes for neck pain: validation of a new outcome measure.

Authors:  Peter White; George Lewith; Phil Prescott
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-09-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 5.  Clinically important outcomes in low back pain.

Authors:  Raymond W J G Ostelo; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.098

6.  Is patient satisfaction a legitimate outcome of pain management?

Authors:  John Carlson; Richard Youngblood; Jo Ann Dalton; William Blau; Celeste Lindley
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 3.612

7.  Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments.

Authors:  A J H M Beurskens; H C W de Vet; A J A Köke
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 6.961

8.  Does the outcome 2 months after lumbar disc surgery predict the outcome 12 months later?

Authors:  Arja Hakkinen; Jari Ylinen; Hannu Kautiainen; Olavi Airaksinen; Arto Herno; Ilkka Kiviranta
Journal:  Disabil Rehabil       Date:  2003-09-02       Impact factor: 3.033

9.  The evaluation of the surgical management of nerve root compression in patients with low back pain: Part 1: the assessment of outcome.

Authors:  Alison H McGregor; Sean P F Hughes
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2002-07-01       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  A randomised controlled trial of post-operative rehabilitation after surgical decompression of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  Anne F Mannion; Raymond Denzler; Jiri Dvorak; Markus Müntener; Dieter Grob
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2007-06-26       Impact factor: 3.134

View more
  72 in total

1.  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

2.  Spine Tango registry data collection in a conservative spinal service: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Samuel Morris; James Booth; James Hegarty
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-07-20       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Incidental durotomy in decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis: incidence, risk factors and effect on outcomes in the Spine Tango registry.

Authors:  Christian Herren; Rolf Sobottke; Anne F Mannion; Thomas Zweig; Everard Munting; Philippe Otten; Tim Pigott; Jan Siewe; Emin Aghayev
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-06-20       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  How does patient-rated outcome change over time following the surgical treatment of degenerative disorders of the thoracolumbar spine?

Authors:  Tamas F Fekete; M Loibl; D Jeszenszky; D Haschtmann; P Banczerowski; F S Kleinstück; H J Becker; F Porchet; A F Mannion
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-10-27       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Reliability and validity of the cross-culturally adapted French version of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) in patients with low back pain.

Authors:  Stéphane Genevay; Christine Cedraschi; Marc Marty; Sylvie Rozenberg; Pierre De Goumoëns; Antonio Faundez; Federico Balagué; François Porchet; Anne F Mannion
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-09-01       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 6.  How to Tango: a manual for implementing Spine Tango.

Authors:  T Zweig; A F Mannion; D Grob; M Melloh; E Munting; A Tuschel; M Aebi; C Röder
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-06-28       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Factor analysis of the SRS-22 outcome assessment instrument in patients with adult spinal deformity.

Authors:  A F Mannion; A Elfering; J Bago; F Pellise; A Vila-Casademunt; S Richner-Wunderlin; M Domingo-Sàbat; I Obeid; E Acaroglu; A Alanay; F S Pérez-Grueso; C R Baldus; L Y Carreon; K H Bridwell; S D Glassman; F Kleinstück
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-09-02       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  Money matters: exploiting the data from outcomes research for quality improvement initiatives.

Authors:  Franco M Impellizzeri; Mario Bizzini; Michael Leunig; Nicola A Maffiuletti; Anne F Mannion
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-03-18       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.  Validity of the Japanese core outcome measures index (COMI)-neck for cervical spine surgery: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Yasushi Oshima; Kosei Nagata; Hideki Nakamoto; Ryuji Sakamoto; Yujiro Takeshita; Nozomu Ohtomo; Naohiro Kawamura; Masaaki Iizuka; Takashi Ono; Koji Nakajima; Akiro Higashikawa; Takahiko Yoshimoto; Tomoko Fujii; Sakae Tanaka; Hiroyuki Oka; Ko Matsudaira
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.