Psychometric properties of the functional rating index in patients with low back pain

European Spine Journal

Volumn 14, Issue 10, 2005, Pages 1008-1012

  Childs, Maj John D ^a,c   Piva, Sara R ^b  

^a WILFORD HALL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^c NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Minimum clinically important difference; Outcome measure; Reliability; Responsiveness; Self report measure

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; ERROR; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LOW BACK PAIN; MALE; MEASUREMENT; NECK PAIN; PATIENT; PERCEPTION; PHYSIOTHERAPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; RATING SCALE; RELIABILITY; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; COHORT STUDIES; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LOW BACK PAIN; MIDDLE AGED; NECK PAIN; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 29144478809     PISSN: 09406719     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00586-005-0900-z     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Deyo RA, Phillips WR (1996) Low back pain. A primary care challenge. Spine 21:2826-2832
2. Cote P, Cassidy JD, Carroll L (2000) The factors associated with neck pain and its related disability in the Saskatchewan population. Spine 25:1109-1117
3. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB (2000) The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 25:2940-2953
4. Vernon H, Mior S (1991) The neck disability index: a study of reliability and validity. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 14:409-415
5. Feise RJ, Michael MJ (2001) Functional rating index: a new valid and reliable instrument to measure the magnitude of clinical change in spinal conditions. Spine 26:78-86
6. Bayar B, Bayar K, Yakut E, Yakut Y (2004) Reliability and validity of the Functional Rating Index in older people with low back pain: preliminary report. Aging Clin Exp Res 16:49-52
7. Childs JD, Fritz JM, Flynn TW, Irrgang JJ, Delitto A, Johnson KK, Majkowski GR (2004) Validation of a clinical prediction rule to identify patients likely to benefit from spinal manipulation: a randomized clinical trial. Ann Intern Med (in Press)
8. Fritz JM, Irrgang JJ (2001) A comparison of a modified oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire and the quebec back pain disability scale. Phys Ther 81:776-788
9. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH (1989) Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 10:407-415
10. Goldsmith CH, Boers M, Bombardier C, Tugwell P (1993) Criteria for clinically important changes in outcomes: development scoring and evaluation of rheumatoid arthritis patient and trial profiles. OMERACT Committee. J Rheumatol 20:561-565
11. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willan A, Griffith LE (1994) Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 47:81-87
12. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86:420-428
13. Wyrwich KW, TierneyWM, Wolinsky FD (1999) Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 52:861-873
14. Eliasziw M, Young SL, Woodbury MG, Fryday-Field K (1994) Statistical methodology for the concurrent assessment of interrater and intrarater reliability: using goniometric measurements as an example. Phys Ther 74:777-788
15. Roebroeck ME, Harlaar J, Lankhorst GJ (1993) The application of generalizability theory to reliability assessment: an illustration using isometric force measurements. Phys Ther 73:386-395
16. Wyrwich KW, Nienaber NA, Tierney WM, Wolinsky FD (1999) Linking clinical relevance and statistical significance in evaluating intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. Med Care 37:469-478
17. Altman DG, Machin D, Bryant TN, Gardner MJ (2000) Statistics with confidence 2nd edn. British Medical Journal Bristol
18. Deyo RA, Centor RM (1986) Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis 39:897-906
19. Kopec JA, Esdaile JM (1995) Functional disability scales for back pain. Spine 20:1943-1949
20. Stratford PW, Binkley FM, Riddle DL (1996) Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. Phys Ther 76:1109-1123
21. Cherkin D (2001) Point of view: functional rating index: a new valid and reliable instrument to measure the magnitude of clinical change in spinal conditions. Spine 26:87
22. Wells G, Beaton D, Shea B, Boers M, Simon L, Strand V, Brooks P, Tugwell P (2001) Minimal clinically important differences: review of methods. J Rheumatol 28:406-412
23. Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL, Guyatt GH (1998) Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 1. Phys Ther 78:1186-1196
24. Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Koke AJ (1996) Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments. Pain 65:71-76
25. Stratford PW, Finch E, Solomon P (1996) Using the Roland-Morris Questionnaire to make decisions about individual patients. Physiother Can 48:107-110
26. Stratford PW, Binkley J, Solomon P, Finch E, Gill C, Moreland J (1996) Defining the minimum level of detectable change for the Roland-Morris questionnaire. Phys Ther 76:359-365