Alexandra R Griffin1, Andrew M Leaver, Mohit Arora, David M Walton, Aimie Peek, Aila N Bandong, Michele Sterling, Trudy Rebbeck. 1. Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia John Walsh Centre for Rehabilitation Research, Level 12, Kolling Institute of Medical Research, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, NSW, Australia Sydney Medical School - Northern, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW Australia School of Physical Therapy, Western University, London, Canada NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Road Traffic Injury, The University of Queensland, QLD, Australia The University of the Philippines Manila, College of Allied Medical Professions, PGH Compound, Pedro Gil St, Manila, Philippines Recover Injury Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Level 7, UQ Oral Health Centre, Herston, QLD, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: A core outcomes set (COS) for whiplash associated disorders (WAD) has been proposed to improve consistency of outcome reporting in clinical trials. Patient-reported disability was one outcome of interest within this COS. The aim of this review was to identify the most suitable tool for measuring self-reported disability in WAD, based on clinimetric performance. METHODS: Database searches took place in two stages. The first identified outcome measures used to assess self-reported disability in WAD, and the second identified studies assessing the clinimetric properties of these outcome measures in WAD. Data on study, population and outcome measure characteristics were extracted, along with clinimetric data. Quality and clinimetric performance were assessed in accordance with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). RESULTS: Of 19,663 records identified in stage 1 searches, 32 were retained following stage 2 searches and screening. Both the WDQ and NDI performed well in reliability (ICC 0.84-0.98), construct validity (74-82% of hypotheses accepted) and responsiveness (majority of correlations in accordance with hypotheses). Both received Category B recommendations due to a lack of evidence for content validity. DISCUSSION: This review identified the NDI and WDQ as the most appropriate PROMs for assessing self-reported disability in WAD based on moderate to high quality evidence for sufficient reliability, construct validity and responsiveness. However, the content validity of these PROMs has yet to be established in WAD and until this is undertaken, it is not possible to recommend one PROM over the other for inclusion in the WAD COS.
OBJECTIVES: A core outcomes set (COS) for whiplash associated disorders (WAD) has been proposed to improve consistency of outcome reporting in clinical trials. Patient-reported disability was one outcome of interest within this COS. The aim of this review was to identify the most suitable tool for measuring self-reported disability in WAD, based on clinimetric performance. METHODS: Database searches took place in two stages. The first identified outcome measures used to assess self-reported disability in WAD, and the second identified studies assessing the clinimetric properties of these outcome measures in WAD. Data on study, population and outcome measure characteristics were extracted, along with clinimetric data. Quality and clinimetric performance were assessed in accordance with the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN). RESULTS: Of 19,663 records identified in stage 1 searches, 32 were retained following stage 2 searches and screening. Both the WDQ and NDI performed well in reliability (ICC 0.84-0.98), construct validity (74-82% of hypotheses accepted) and responsiveness (majority of correlations in accordance with hypotheses). Both received Category B recommendations due to a lack of evidence for content validity. DISCUSSION: This review identified the NDI and WDQ as the most appropriate PROMs for assessing self-reported disability in WAD based on moderate to high quality evidence for sufficient reliability, construct validity and responsiveness. However, the content validity of these PROMs has yet to be established in WAD and until this is undertaken, it is not possible to recommend one PROM over the other for inclusion in the WAD COS.
Authors: Helge Kasch; Tina Carstensen; Sophie Lykkegaard Ravn; Tonny Elmose Andersen; Lisbeth Frostholm Journal: Front Pain Res (Lausanne) Date: 2022-07-07