Concurrent comparison of responsiveness in pain and functional status measurements used for patients with low back pain
- PMID: 15507789
- DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000143664.02702.0b
Concurrent comparison of responsiveness in pain and functional status measurements used for patients with low back pain
Abstract
Study design: Prospective study of two samples of patients with acute and chronic low back pain, respectively.
Objectives: To compare the responsiveness of four functional status questionnaires, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Disability Rating Index (DRI), and Physical Functioning scale of the SF-36 (PFSF-36), and two pain scales, a Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS).
Summary of background data: Concurrent comparisons of different outcome measurements in back patients have been requested.
Methods: Norwegian versions of the scales and questionnaires were completed by 54 patients with acute (<3 weeks) and 50 patients with chronic low back pain (>3 months). Clinical change was estimated on a global change index. An alternative external criterion was the expected clinical course in the two cohorts. Mean changes, standardized response mean (SRM), and area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves with cutoff point for highest sensitivity and specificity were calculated.
Results: At the follow-up, 63% of the acute and 41% of the chronic sample reported improvement on the global change index. Large SRMs (1.3-2.0) and areas under the ROC curves (0.84-0.93) were found for the measurements in the acute sample. In the chronic sample, the SRMs (0.4-1.1) and areas under the ROC curves (0.65-0.83) were lower, in particular for the PFSF-36 and the VAS. There was no statistically significant difference between the responsiveness in the measurements, except for higher responsiveness in the NRS compared with the VAS when using expected clinical course as the external criterion for change.
Conclusion: The results suggest that all the outcome measures were appropriate for measuring changes in functional status and pain in patients with acute low back pain, whereas among chronic patients the RMDQ, ODI, DRI, and NRS were most appropriate.
Comment in
-
Re: Grotle M, Brox JI, Vøllestad NK. Concurrent comparison of responsiveness in pain and functional status measures used for patients with low back pain. Spine 2004;29:E492-E501.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005 Jun 1;30(11):1341-2; author reply 1342. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000163887.17208.f1. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005. PMID: 15928563 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference for pain and disability instruments in low back pain patients.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006 Oct 25;7:82. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-7-82. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006. PMID: 17064410 Free PMC article.
-
Responsiveness of a patient specific outcome measure compared with the Oswestry Disability Index v2.1 and Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire for patients with subacute and chronic low back pain.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Oct 15;33(22):2450-7; discussion 2458. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818916fd. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008. PMID: 18824951
-
Responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire in Italian subjects with sub-acute and chronic low back pain.Eur Spine J. 2012 Jan;21(1):122-9. doi: 10.1007/s00586-011-1959-3. Epub 2011 Aug 8. Eur Spine J. 2012. PMID: 21823035 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
[Evaluation of treatment for chronic low back pain].Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2014 Jan;28(1):119-22. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2014. PMID: 24693793 Review. Chinese.
-
Measuring the functional status of patients with low back pain. Assessment of the quality of four disease-specific questionnaires.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995 May 1;20(9):1017-28. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199505000-00008. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995. PMID: 7631231 Review.
Cited by
-
Danish version of the Oswestry disability index for patients with low back pain. Part 2: Sensitivity, specificity and clinically significant improvement in two low back pain populations.Eur Spine J. 2006 Nov;15(11):1717-28. doi: 10.1007/s00586-006-0128-6. Epub 2006 May 31. Eur Spine J. 2006. PMID: 16736202
-
External Training Load and the Association With Back Pain in Competitive Adolescent Tennis Players: Results From the SMASH Cohort Study.Sports Health. 2022 Jan-Feb;14(1):111-118. doi: 10.1177/19417381211051636. Epub 2021 Oct 25. Sports Health. 2022. PMID: 34693813 Free PMC article.
-
Neck and back pain: Differences between patients treated in primary and specialist health care.J Rehabil Med. 2022 Jul 13;54:jrm00300. doi: 10.2340/jrm.v54.363. J Rehabil Med. 2022. PMID: 35657413 Free PMC article.
-
Lumbar Decompression Versus Spinal Fusion in a Private Outpatient Setting: A Retrospective Study with Three Years of Follow-up.Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo). 2021 Sep 11;56(6):766-771. doi: 10.1055/s-0041-1724083. eCollection 2021 Dec. Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo). 2021. PMID: 34900105 Free PMC article.
-
Effectiveness of vertebroplasty using individual patient data from two randomised placebo controlled trials: meta-analysis.BMJ. 2011 Jul 12;343:d3952. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d3952. BMJ. 2011. PMID: 21750078 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials