Literature DB >> 20397032

Outcome measures in chronic low back pain.

Elaine F Maughan1, Jeremy S Lewis.   

Abstract

The purpose of this prospective, single site cohort quasi-experimental study was to determine the responsiveness of the numerical rating scale (NRS), Roland-Morris disability questionnaire (RMDQ), Oswestry disability index (ODI), pain self-efficacy questionnaire (PSEQ) and the patient-specific functional scale (PSFS) in order to determine which would best measure clinically meaningful change in a chronic low back pain (LBP) population. Several patient-based outcome instruments are currently used to measure treatment effect in the chronic LBP population. However, there is a lack of consensus on what constitutes a "successful" outcome, how an important improvement/deterioration has been defined and which outcome measure(s) best captures the effectiveness of therapeutic interventions for the chronic LBP population. Sixty-three consecutive patients with chronic LBP referred to a back exercise and education class participated in this study; 48 of the 63 patients had complete data. Five questionnaires were administered initially and after the 5-week back class intervention. Also at 5 weeks, patients completed a global impression of change as a reflection of meaningful change in patient status. Score changes in the five different questionnaires were subjected to both distribution- and anchor-based methods: standard error of measurement (SEM) and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves to define clinical improvement. From these methods, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) defined as the smallest difference that patients and clinicians perceive to be worthwhile is presented for each instrument. Based on the SEM, a point score change of 2.4 in the NRS, 5 in the RMDQ, 17 in the ODI, 11 on the PSEQ, and 1.4 on the PSFS corresponded to the MCID. Based on ROC curve analysis, a point score change of 4 points for both the NRS and RMDQ, 8 points for the ODI, 9 points for the PSEQ and 2 points for the PSFS corresponded to the MCID. The ROC analysis demonstrated that both the PSEQ and PSFS are responsive to clinically important change over time. The NRS was found to be least responsive. The exact value of the MCID is not a fixed value and is dependent on the assessment method used to calculate the score change. Based on ROC curve analysis the PSFS and PSEQ were more responsive than the other scales in measuring change in patients with chronic LBP following participation in a back class programme. However, due to the small sample size, the lack of observed worsening of symptoms over time, the single centre and intervention studied these results which need to be interpreted with caution.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20397032      PMCID: PMC2989277          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-010-1353-6

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


  53 in total

Review 1.  Assessing global pain severity by self-report in clinical and health services research.

Authors:  M Von Korff; M P Jensen; P Karoly
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-12-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Reproducibility and responsiveness of evaluative outcome measures. Theoretical considerations illustrated by an empirical example.

Authors:  H C de Vet; L M Bouter; P D Bezemer; A J Beurskens
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation.

Authors:  C B Terwee; F W Dekker; W M Wiersinga; M F Prummel; P M M Bossuyt
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life.

Authors:  Ross D Crosby; Ronette L Kolotkin; G Rhys Williams
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness.

Authors:  Megan Davidson; Jennifer L Keating
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2002-01

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

Authors:  O Hägg; P Fritzell; A Nordwall
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2002-10-24       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Assessing the clinical significance of change scores recorded on subjective outcome measures.

Authors:  Hugh Hurst; Jennifer Bolton
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 1.437

Review 8.  Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of treatments for patients with chronic pain.

Authors:  Dennis C Turk
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.442

9.  Reliability and stability of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire: intra class correlation and limits of agreement.

Authors:  S Brouwer; W Kuijer; P U Dijkstra; L N H Göeken; J W Groothoff; J H B Geertzen
Journal:  Disabil Rehabil       Date:  2004-02-04       Impact factor: 3.033

10.  Performance problems of patients with chronic low-back pain and the measurement of patient-centered outcome.

Authors:  David Andrew Walsh; Sarah Jane Kelly; Primal Sebastian Johnson; Shanmugasundram Rajkumar; Kate Bennetts
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2004-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  91 in total

1.  Are Modic changes prognostic for recovery in a cohort of patients with non-specific low back pain?

Authors:  Anne Keller; Eleanor Boyle; Thomas A Skog; J David Cassidy; Erik Bautz-Holter
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-08-12       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  A community pain service solution-focused pain management programme: delivery and preliminary outcome data.

Authors:  Rebecca Simm; Joanne Iddon; Chris Barker
Journal:  Br J Pain       Date:  2014-02

3.  A randomized clinical trial comparing non-thrust manipulation with segmental and distal dry needling on pain, disability, and rate of recovery for patients with non-specific low back pain.

Authors:  D Griswold; F Gargano; K E Learman
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2019-02-09

4.  Effect of spinal manipulative therapy on mechanical pain sensitivity in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain: a pilot randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  Bryan M Bond; Chris D Kinslow; Adam W Yoder; Wen Liu
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2019-03-05

5.  How much does the Dallas Pain Questionnaire score have to improve to indicate that patients with chronic low back pain feel better or well?

Authors:  M Marty; D Courvoisier; V Foltz; G Mahieu; C Demoulin; A Gierasimowicz; M Norberg; P de Goumoëns; C Cedraschi; S Rozenberg; S Genevay
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-04-23       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  The Italian version of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity in patients with chronic low back pain.

Authors:  Marco Monticone; Luca Frigau; Francesco Mola; Barbara Rocca; Franco Franchignoni; Salvatore Simone Vullo; Calogero Foti; Alessandro Chiarotto
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-09-26       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  A randomized control trial to determine the effectiveness and physiological effects of spinal manipulation and spinal mobilization compared to each other and a sham condition in patients with chronic low back pain: Study protocol for The RELIEF Study.

Authors:  Brian C Clark; David W Russ; Masato Nakazawa; Christopher R France; Stevan Walkowski; Timothy D Law; Megan Applegate; Niladri Mahato; Samuel Lietkam; James Odenthal; Daniel Corcos; Simeon Hain; Betty Sindelar; Robert J Ploutz-Snyder; James S Thomas
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2018-05-21       Impact factor: 2.226

8.  Evaluation of uptake and effect on patient-reported outcomes of a clinician and patient co-led chronic musculoskeletal pain self-management programme provided by the UK National Health Service.

Authors:  Joanna K Anderson; Louise M Wallace
Journal:  Br J Pain       Date:  2017-09-26

9.  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

10.  A Systematic Review of Head-to-Head Comparison Studies of the Roland-Morris and Oswestry Measures' Abilities to Assess Change.

Authors:  Anastasia N L Newman; Paul W Stratford; Lori Letts; Gregory Spadoni
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.037

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.