Steven L Bokshan1, Jakub Godzik2, Jonathan Dalton1, Jennifer Jaffe1, Lawrence G Lenke3, Michael P Kelly4. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Ave, Box 8233, St. Louis, MO, USA. 2. Division of Neurological Surgery, Barrow Neurological Institute, St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, 350 W Thomas Rd, Phoenix, AZ 85013, USA. 3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons, The Spine Hospital, 5141 Broadway Ave, New York, NY 10034, USA. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 South Euclid Ave, Box 8233, St. Louis, MO, USA. Electronic address: kellymi@wudosis.wustl.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The non-response rates are as high as 20% to 50% after 5 years of follow-up in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. Minimizing loss to follow-up is essential to protect the quality of data in long-term studies. Phone and internet administration of outcomes instruments has grown in popularity and has been found to not only provide a convenient way of collecting data, but also show improved response rates. PURPOSE: The study aimed to examine the reliability of the revised Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22r) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaires in ASD patients when administered by telephone. STUDY DESIGN/ SETTING: This is a single-center, randomized crossover phone validation of ASD patients. PATIENT SAMPLE: The study included ASD patients presenting to a tertiary spine care center. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures were ODI and SRS-22r. METHODS:Forty-nine patients (mean age: 55.7 years) with ASD were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either phone completion of the SRS-22r and ODI followed by in-office completion, or to in-office completion followed by phone completion. An interval of 2 to 4 weeks was placed between administrations of each version. A paired t test was used to assess the difference between the written and phone versions, and intraclass correlation coefficients were used to assess homogeneity. Finally, goodness-of-fit testing was used to assess version preference. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the phone and in-office versions of the SRS-22r (p=.174) or the ODI (p=.320). The intraclass correlation coefficients of the SRS-22r and ODI were 0.91 and 0.86, respectively. Completion over the phone was the most popular option (57% preferred phone, 29% preferred in-office, and 14% had no preference). CONCLUSIONS: Phone administration of the SRS-22r and ODI to ASD patients provides a convenient and reliable tool for reducing loss of follow-up data.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The non-response rates are as high as 20% to 50% after 5 years of follow-up in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. Minimizing loss to follow-up is essential to protect the quality of data in long-term studies. Phone and internet administration of outcomes instruments has grown in popularity and has been found to not only provide a convenient way of collecting data, but also show improved response rates. PURPOSE: The study aimed to examine the reliability of the revised Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22r) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) questionnaires in ASDpatients when administered by telephone. STUDY DESIGN/ SETTING: This is a single-center, randomized crossover phone validation of ASDpatients. PATIENT SAMPLE: The study included ASDpatients presenting to a tertiary spine care center. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures were ODI and SRS-22r. METHODS: Forty-nine patients (mean age: 55.7 years) with ASD were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either phone completion of the SRS-22r and ODI followed by in-office completion, or to in-office completion followed by phone completion. An interval of 2 to 4 weeks was placed between administrations of each version. A paired t test was used to assess the difference between the written and phone versions, and intraclass correlation coefficients were used to assess homogeneity. Finally, goodness-of-fit testing was used to assess version preference. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the phone and in-office versions of the SRS-22r (p=.174) or the ODI (p=.320). The intraclass correlation coefficients of the SRS-22r and ODI were 0.91 and 0.86, respectively. Completion over the phone was the most popular option (57% preferred phone, 29% preferred in-office, and 14% had no preference). CONCLUSIONS: Phone administration of the SRS-22r and ODI to ASDpatients provides a convenient and reliable tool for reducing loss of follow-up data.
Authors: Janet Bradley; B M Ramesh; S Rajaram; Anil Lobo; Kaveri Gurav; Shajy Isac; G Chandra Shekhar Gowda; R Pushpalatha; Stephen Moses; Kumar D R Sunil; Michel Alary Journal: AIDS Care Date: 2012-01-31
Authors: Keith H Bridwell; Sigurd Berven; Steven Glassman; Christopher Hamill; William C Horton; Lawrence G Lenke; Frank Schwab; Christine Baldus; Michael Shainline Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2007-09-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Marie Beauséjour; Julie Joncas; Lise Goulet; Marjolaine Roy-Beaudry; Stefan Parent; Guy Grimard; Martin Forcier; Sophie Lauriault; Hubert Labelle Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2009-03-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Arjan G J Bot; Stéphanie J E Becker; Marianne F Mol; David Ring; Ana-Maria Vranceanu Journal: J Hand Surg Am Date: 2013-05-24 Impact factor: 2.230
Authors: Juan Bago; Jose M Climent; Anna Ey; Francisco J S Perez-Grueso; Enrique Izquierdo Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2004-08-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Brandon J Erickson; Peter N Chalmers; Jon Newgren; Marissa Malaret; Michael O'Brien; Gregory P Nicholson; Anthony A Romeo Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2018-08-14