Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Sep;30(9):2631-2644.
doi: 10.1007/s00586-020-06554-w. Epub 2020 Aug 19.

Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Dutch version of the AOSpine PROST (Patient Reported Outcome Spine Trauma)

Said Sadiqi  1 , Marcel W Post  2   3 , Allard J Hosman  4 , Marcel F Dvorak  5 , Jens R Chapman  6 , Lorin M Benneker  7 , Frank Kandziora  8 , S Rajasekaran  9 , Klaus J Schnake  10 , Alexander R Vaccaro  11 , F Cumhur Oner  12
Affiliations
Free article

Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Dutch version of the AOSpine PROST (Patient Reported Outcome Spine Trauma)

Said Sadiqi et al. Eur Spine J. 2021 Sep.
Free article

Abstract

Purpose: To validate the Dutch version of AOSpine PROST (Patient Reported Outcome Spine Trauma).

Methods: Patients were recruited from two level-1 trauma centers from the Netherlands. Next to the AOSpine PROST, patients also filled out SF-36 for concurrent validity. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the characteristics. Content validity was assessed by evaluating the number of inapplicable or missing questions. Also floor and ceiling effects were analyzed. Internal consistency was assessed by calculating Cronbach's α and item-total correlation coefficients (itcc). Spearman correlation tests were performed within AOSpine PROST items and in correlation with SF-36. Test-retest reliability was analyzed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC). Responsiveness was assessed by calculating effect sizes (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM). Factor analysis was performed to explore any dimensions within AOSpine PROST.

Results: Out of 179 enrolled patients, 163 (91.1%) were included. Good results were obtained for content validity. No floor or ceiling effects were seen. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.96, itcc 0.50-0.86), with also good Spearman correlations (0.25-0.79). Compared to SF-36, the strongest correlation was seen for physical functioning (0.79; p < .001). Also test-retest reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.92). Concerning responsiveness analysis, very good results were seen with ES = 1.81 and SRM = 2.03 (p < 0.001). Factor analysis revealed two possible dimensions (Eigenvalues > 1), explaining 65.4% of variance.

Conclusions: Very satisfactory results were obtained for reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Dutch version of AOSpine PROST. Treating surgeons are encouraged to use this novel and validated tool in clinical setting and research to contribute to evidence-based and patient-centered care.

Keywords: AOSpine PROST; Function; Health; Outcome instrument; Patient perspective; Spine trauma.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Oner FC, Jacobs WC, Lehr AM, Sadiqi S, Post MW, Aarabi B, Chapman JR, Dvorak MF, Fehlings MG, Kandziora F, Rajasekaran S, Vaccaro AR (2016) Toward the development of a universal outcome instrument for Spine Trauma: a systematic review and content comparison of outcome measures used in spine Trauma research using the icf as reference. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41:358–367. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001207 - DOI
    1. Schoenfeld AJ, Wood KB, Fisher CF, Fehlings M, Oner FC, Bouchard K, Arnold P, Vaccaro AR, Sekhorn L, Harris MB, Bono CM (2010) Posttraumatic kyphosis: current state of diagnosis and treatment: results of a multinational survey of spine trauma surgeons. J Spinal Disord Tech 23:e1–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e3181c03517 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Stadhouder A, Buckens CF, Holtslag HR, Oner FC (2010) Are existing outcome instruments suitable for assessment of spinal trauma patients? J Neurosurg Spine 13:638–647. https://doi.org/10.3171/2010.5.SPINE09128 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Korovessis P, Baikousis A, Zacharatos S, Petsinis G, Koureas G, Iliopoulos P (2006) Combined anterior plus posterior stabilization versus posterior short-segment instrumentation and fusion for mid-lumbar (L2–L4) burst fractures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31:859–868. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000209251.65417.16 - DOI
    1. Wood KB, Li W, Lebl DR, Ploumis A (2014) Management of thoracolumbar spine fractures. Spine J 14:145–164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2012.10.041 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types