Literature DB >> 21289546

Converting SRS-24, SRS-23, and SRS-22 to SRS-22r: establishing conversion equations using regression modeling.

Sue-Min Lai1, Douglas C Burton, Marc A Asher, Brandon B Carlson.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Cross-sectional mail questionnaire.
OBJECTIVE: Assess the feasibility of translating total and domain scores from Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-24, SRS-23, and SRS-22 to SRS-22r. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Three successive editions of the original SRS-24 health-related quality-of-life questionnaire have resulted from efforts to improve its psychometric properties and validate its use in patients down to 10 years of age. This resulted in the need to establish, if possible, conversion equations to the last and most thoroughly validated version, SRS-22r.
METHODS: A consolidated questionnaire of 49 questions that incorporated the various questions in the four questionnaires was mailed to a consecutive series of 235 patients who had received primary posterior or anterior instrumentation and arthrodesis to treat adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Regression modeling was used to establish conversion equations from the SRS-24, SRS-23, and SRS-22 to the SRS-22r.
RESULTS: One hundred twenty-one of the 235 patients (51%), aged 23.3 ± 4.52 years (range 14.2-34.6 years), returned the questionnaire at 8.6 ± 4.00 years (range 2.3-15.9 years) following surgery. Estimation of SRS-22r questionnaire and nonmanagement domains total scores and mean scores from SRS-22 and SRS-23 scores is excellent (R2 scores of 0.97-0.99) and good for SRS-24 scores (R2 scores of 0.80-0.82, improving to 0.86 and 0.87 after minimal domain reconfiguration). Estimation of SRS-22r individual domain total scores and mean scores from SRS-22 and SRS-23 is good to excellent (R2 scores of 0.81-0.99). Minimal domain reconfiguration improves conversion from SRS-24 pain from R2 = 0.71 to 0.76, which are both fair; SRS-24 function from R2 = 0.69 and 0.74 to 0.83, from poor and fair to good; and SRS-24 satisfaction/dissatisfaction with management from R2 = 0.64 to 0.80, from poor to good. Conversion of SRS-24 self-image is poor (R2 = 0.60) despite the correlation being statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: With one exception, SRS-24, SRS-23, and SRS-22 questionnaire, nonmanagement domains, and individual domain total scores and mean scores can be translated to SRS-22r scores with fair to excellent accuracy, which is further improved in some instances by minimal domain reconfigurations. The sole exception is SRS-24 self-image, which translates poorly.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21289546     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182118adf

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


  10 in total

1.  Population-based normative data for the Scoliosis Research Society 22r questionnaire in adolescents and adults, including a comparison with EQ-5D.

Authors:  Elias Diarbakerli; Anna Grauers; Paul Gerdhem
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Measuring outcomes in adult spinal deformity surgery: a systematic review to identify current strengths, weaknesses and gaps in patient-reported outcome measures.

Authors:  Sayf S A Faraj; Miranda L van Hooff; Roderick M Holewijn; David W Polly; Tsjitske M Haanstra; Marinus de Kleuver
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Effect of surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis on the quality of life: a prospective study with a minimum 5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Massimo Mariconda; Claudia Andolfi; Simone Cerbasi; Valeria Servodidio
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-03-16       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Quality of life outcomes in surgically treated adult scoliosis patients: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jennifer Theis; Paul Gerdhem; Allan Abbott
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Psychometric Properties of the Scoliosis Research Society Questionnaire (Version 22r) Domains Among Adults With Spinal Deformity: A Rasch Measurement Theory Analysis.

Authors:  Kati Kyrölä; Susanna Hiltunen; Mikko M Uimonen; Jari Ylinen; Arja Häkkinen; Jussi P Repo
Journal:  Neurospine       Date:  2022-05-15

6.  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 7.  Outcome instruments to assess scoliosis surgery.

Authors:  Juan Bagó; Jose Ma Climent; Francisco J S Pérez-Grueso; Ferran Pellisé
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-05-11       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  2016 SOSORT guidelines: orthopaedic and rehabilitation treatment of idiopathic scoliosis during growth.

Authors:  Stefano Negrini; Sabrina Donzelli; Angelo Gabriele Aulisa; Dariusz Czaprowski; Sanja Schreiber; Jean Claude de Mauroy; Helmut Diers; Theodoros B Grivas; Patrick Knott; Tomasz Kotwicki; Andrea Lebel; Cindy Marti; Toru Maruyama; Joe O'Brien; Nigel Price; Eric Parent; Manuel Rigo; Michele Romano; Luke Stikeleather; James Wynne; Fabio Zaina
Journal:  Scoliosis Spinal Disord       Date:  2018-01-10

Review 9.  Optimal management of idiopathic scoliosis in adolescence.

Authors:  Tomasz Kotwicki; Joanna Chowanska; Edyta Kinel; Dariusz Czaprowski; Marek Tomaszewski; Piotr Janusz
Journal:  Adolesc Health Med Ther       Date:  2013-07-23

10.  Post-marketing surveillance on safety and efficacy of posterior spinal correction and fusion with the CD Horizon Solera instrumentation for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Lotte Deirdre Elizabeth Dingena Maria Smals; Marcus Hubertus Harrietta Maria Hulsbosch; Sjoerd Ian Patrick Jozef de Faber; Jacobus J C Arts; Lodewijk W van Rhijn; Paul Cornelis Willems
Journal:  N Am Spine Soc J       Date:  2021-10-16
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.