Nuno Rui Paulino Pereira1, Stein J Janssen2, Kevin A Raskin2, Francis J Hornicek2, Marco L Ferrone3, John H Shin4, Jos A M Bramer5, Cornelis Nicolaas van Dijk5, Joseph H Schwab2. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic Oncology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114, USA. Electronic address: nunorui.pp@gmail.com. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic Oncology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114, USA. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic Oncology Service, Brigham and Women's Hospital-Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115, USA. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital-Harvard Medical School, 55 Fruit St, Boston, MA 02114, USA. 5. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Academic Medical Center-University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Assessing quality of life, functional outcome, and pain has become important in assessing the effectiveness of treatment for metastatic spine disease. Many questionnaires are able to measure these outcomes; few are validated in patients with metastatic spine disease. As a result, there is no consensus on the ideal questionnaire to use in these patients. PURPOSE: Our study aim was to assess whether certain questionnaires measuring quality of life, functional outcome, and pain (1) correlated with each other, (2) measured the construct they claim to measure, (3) had good coverage-floor and ceiling effects, (4) were reliable, and (5) whether there were differences in completion time between them. DESIGN: This is a prospective cross-sectional survey study from three outpatient clinics (two orthopedic oncology clinics and one neurosurgery clinic) from two affiliated tertiary hospital care centers. PATIENT SAMPLE: We included 100 consecutive patients with metastatic spine disease between July 2014 and February 2016. We excluded non-English-speaking patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: The following questionnaires were given in random order: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) or Neck Disability Index (NDI), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function, PROMIS Pain Intensity, EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), and the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcome Questionnaire (SOSG-OQ). METHODS: We used exploratory factor analysis-correlating questionnaires with an underlying mathematically derived trait-to assess if questionnaires measured the same concept. Coverage was assessed by floor and ceiling effects, and reliability was assessed by standard error of measurement as a function of ability. Differences in completion times were tested using the Friedman test. RESULTS: Questionnaires measured the construct they were developed for, as demonstrated with high correlations (>0.7) with the underlying trait. A floor effect was present in the PROMIS Pain Intensity (7.0%), ODI or NDI (4.0%), and the PROMIS Physical Function (1.0%) questionnaires. A ceiling effect was present in the EQ-5D questionnaire (6.0%). The SOSG-OQ had no floor or ceiling effect. The PROMIS Physical Function and PROMIS Pain Intensity proved to be the most reliable, whereas the EQ-5D was the least reliable. Completion time differed among questionnaires (p<.001) and was shortest for the PROMIS Pain Intensity (median 24 seconds) and PROMIS Physical Function (median 42 seconds). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with metastatic spine disease, we recommend the SOSG-OQ for measuring quality of life, the PROMIS Physical Function for measuring physical function, and the PROMIS Pain Intensity for measuring pain. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Assessing quality of life, functional outcome, and pain has become important in assessing the effectiveness of treatment for metastatic spine disease. Many questionnaires are able to measure these outcomes; few are validated in patients with metastatic spine disease. As a result, there is no consensus on the ideal questionnaire to use in these patients. PURPOSE: Our study aim was to assess whether certain questionnaires measuring quality of life, functional outcome, and pain (1) correlated with each other, (2) measured the construct they claim to measure, (3) had good coverage-floor and ceiling effects, (4) were reliable, and (5) whether there were differences in completion time between them. DESIGN: This is a prospective cross-sectional survey study from three outpatient clinics (two orthopedic oncology clinics and one neurosurgery clinic) from two affiliated tertiary hospital care centers. PATIENT SAMPLE: We included 100 consecutive patients with metastatic spine disease between July 2014 and February 2016. We excluded non-English-speaking patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: The following questionnaires were given in random order: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) or Neck Disability Index (NDI), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function, PROMIS Pain Intensity, EuroQol-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), and the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcome Questionnaire (SOSG-OQ). METHODS: We used exploratory factor analysis-correlating questionnaires with an underlying mathematically derived trait-to assess if questionnaires measured the same concept. Coverage was assessed by floor and ceiling effects, and reliability was assessed by standard error of measurement as a function of ability. Differences in completion times were tested using the Friedman test. RESULTS: Questionnaires measured the construct they were developed for, as demonstrated with high correlations (>0.7) with the underlying trait. A floor effect was present in the PROMIS Pain Intensity (7.0%), ODI or NDI (4.0%), and the PROMIS Physical Function (1.0%) questionnaires. A ceiling effect was present in the EQ-5D questionnaire (6.0%). The SOSG-OQ had no floor or ceiling effect. The PROMIS Physical Function and PROMIS Pain Intensity proved to be the most reliable, whereas the EQ-5D was the least reliable. Completion time differed among questionnaires (p<.001) and was shortest for the PROMIS Pain Intensity (median 24 seconds) and PROMIS Physical Function (median 42 seconds). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with metastatic spine disease, we recommend the SOSG-OQ for measuring quality of life, the PROMIS Physical Function for measuring physical function, and the PROMIS Pain Intensity for measuring pain. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Ori Barzilai; Lily McLaughlin; Mary-Kate Amato; Anne S Reiner; Shahiba Q Ogilvie; Eric Lis; Yoshiya Yamada; Mark H Bilsky; Ilya Laufer Journal: Spine J Date: 2017-11-06 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Nicolas Dea; Anne L Versteeg; Arjun Sahgal; Jorrit-Jan Verlaan; Raphaële Charest-Morin; Laurence D Rhines; Daniel M Sciubba; James M Schuster; Michael H Weber; Aron Lazary; Michael G Fehlings; Michelle J Clarke; Paul M Arnold; Stefano Boriani; Chetan Bettegowda; Ilya Laufer; Ziya L Gokaslan; Charles G Fisher Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Ori Barzilai; Stefano Boriani; Charles G Fisher; Arjun Sahgal; Jorrit Jan Verlaan; Ziya L Gokaslan; Aron Lazary; Chetan Bettegowda; Laurence D Rhines; Ilya Laufer Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2019-05-08
Authors: Omar Kadri; Toufic R Jildeh; Jason E Meldau; Jacob Blanchett; Peter Borowsky; Stephanie Muh; Vasilios Moutzouros; Eric C Makhni Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2018-08-14