Literature DB >> 27356516

Responsiveness of the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia in Italian subjects with chronic low back pain undergoing motor and cognitive rehabilitation.

Marco Monticone1,2, Emilia Ambrosini3, Barbara Rocca4, Calogero Foti5, Simona Ferrante3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) is a commonly used measure for the assessment of kinesiophobia related to spinal diseases. The Italian version showed satisfactory psychometric properties, but its responsiveness has not yet been evaluated. This observational study is aimed at evaluating the responsiveness and minimal important changes (MICs) for the TSK in subjects with chronic low back pain.
METHODS: At the beginning and end of an 8-week multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme, 205 patients completed the TSK. After the programme, patients also completed the global perceived effect (GPE) scale, which was divided to produce a dichotomous outcome. Responsiveness was calculated by distribution [effect size (ES); standardised response mean (SRM)] and anchor-based methods [receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curves; correlations between change scores of the TSK and GPE]. ROC curves were also used to compute the best cut-off levels between subjects with a "good" or "poor" outcome (MICs).
RESULTS: The ES and the SRM were 1.49 and 1.36, respectively. The ROC analyses revealed a MIC value (AUC; sensitivity; specificity) of 5.5 (0.996; 95; 97). To avoid any dependence on the baseline scores, the MIC value [area under the curve (AUC); sensitivity; and specificity] was computed also based on the percentage of change from the baseline and a value of 18 % (0.998; 97; 98 %) was obtained. The correlation between change scores of the TSK and GPE was high (0.871).
CONCLUSIONS: The TSK was sensitive in detecting clinical changes in subjects with chronic low back pain. We recommend taking the MICs provided into account when assessing patients' improvement or planning studies in this clinical context.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chronic low back pain; Kinesiophobia; Minimal important changes; Responsiveness; TSK

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27356516     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-016-4682-2

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


  26 in total

Review 1.  Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations.

Authors:  J A Husted; R J Cook; V T Farewell; D D Gladman
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  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

3.  The minimal detectable change should not replace the minimal important difference.

Authors:  Henrica C W de Vet; Caroline B Terwee
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Fear of movement: factor structure of the tampa scale of kinesiophobia in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome.

Authors:  Tasha Burwinkle; James P Robinson; Dennis C Turk
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 5.820

5.  Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires.

Authors:  Caroline B Terwee; Sandra D M Bot; Michael R de Boer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Dirk L Knol; Joost Dekker; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2006-08-24       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Responsiveness and minimal important changes for the Neck Disability Index and the Neck Pain Disability Scale in Italian subjects with chronic neck pain.

Authors:  Marco Monticone; Emilia Ambrosini; Howard Vernon; Roberto Brunati; Barbara Rocca; Calogero Foti; Simona Ferrante
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-02-07       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 7.  Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes.

Authors:  Dennis Revicki; Ron D Hays; David Cella; Jeff Sloan
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 6.437

8.  Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Norwegian version of the Tampa scale for kinesiophobia.

Authors:  Anne Julsrud Haugen; Lars Grøvle; Anne Keller; Margreth Grotle
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  A multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme improves disability, kinesiophobia and walking ability in subjects with chronic low back pain: results of a randomised controlled pilot study.

Authors:  Marco Monticone; Emilia Ambrosini; Barbara Rocca; Silvia Magni; Flavia Brivio; Simona Ferrante
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-07-27       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  The influence of study population and definition of improvement on the smallest detectable change and the minimal important change of the neck disability index.

Authors:  Wouter Schuller; Raymond W J G Ostelo; Richard Janssen; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2014-04-15       Impact factor: 3.186

View more
  6 in total

1.  Effect of Pain Neuroscience Education Combined With Cognition-Targeted Motor Control Training on Chronic Spinal Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Anneleen Malfliet; Jeroen Kregel; Iris Coppieters; Robby De Pauw; Mira Meeus; Nathalie Roussel; Barbara Cagnie; Lieven Danneels; Jo Nijs
Journal:  JAMA Neurol       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 18.302

2.  Validation of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia for Temporomandibular Disorders (TSK-TMD) in patients with painful TMD.

Authors:  Songlin He; Jinhua Wang; Ping Ji
Journal:  J Headache Pain       Date:  2016-12-05       Impact factor: 7.277

3.  Comparison the Effect of Pain Neuroscience and Pain Biomechanics Education on Neck Pain and Fear of Movement in Patients with Chronic Nonspecific Neck Pain During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Authors:  Zohre Khosrokiani; Amir Letafatkar; Malihe Hadadnezhad; Yahya Sokhanguei
Journal:  Pain Ther       Date:  2022-03-21

4.  Active Virtual Reality for Chronic Primary Pain: Mixed Methods Randomized Pilot Study.

Authors:  Natalie Tuck; Catherine Pollard; Clinton Good; Caitlin Williams; Gwyn Lewis; Murray Hames; Tipu Aamir; Debbie Bean
Journal:  JMIR Form Res       Date:  2022-07-13

5.  Assessing Changes in Fear of Movement in Patients attending Cardiac Rehabilitation: Responsiveness of the TSK-NL Heart Questionnaire.

Authors:  Nienke Ter Hoeve; Paul Keessen; Iris Den Uijl; Bart Visser; Roderik A Kraaijenhagen; Madoka Sunamura; Wilma J M Scholte Op Reimer; Corine H M Latour; Harald T Jørstad; Hendrika J G Van den Berg-Emons
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 3.959

Review 6.  Fear of Movement/(Re)Injury: An Update to Descriptive Review of the Related Measures.

Authors:  Haowei Liu; Li Huang; Zongqian Yang; Hansen Li; Zhenhuan Wang; Li Peng
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-07-07
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.