Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference for pain and disability instruments in low back pain patients

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Volumn 7, Issue , 2006, Pages

  Lauridsen, Henrik H ^a   Hartvigsen, Jan ^a,b   Manniche, Claus ^a,c   Korsholm, Lars ^a   Grunnet Nilsson, Niels ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^b NORDIC INSTITUTE OF CHIROPRACTIC AND CLINICAL BIOMECHANICS   (Denmark)

^c Backcenter Funen ^*  (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISABILITY SEVERITY; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; LEG PAIN; LOW BACK PAIN; MALE; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; PHYSICAL DISABILITY; RATING SCALE; SHORT FORM 36;

ACUTE DISEASE; ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AREA UNDER CURVE; CHRONIC DISEASE; COHORT STUDIES; DENMARK; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LOW BACK PAIN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUESTIONNAIRES; ROC CURVE; SCIATICA; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 33750921275     PISSN: 14712474     EISSN: 14712474     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-7-82     Document Type: Article

References (106)

1. Streiner DL, Norman GR: Health Measurment Scales. A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use Third edition. Edited by: Streiner DL and Norman GR. Oxford, Oxford Medical Publications; 2003.
2. Grotle M, Brox JI, Vollestad NK: Functional Status and Disability Questionnaires: What Do They Assess?: A Systematic Review of Back-Specific Outcome Questionnaires. Spine 2005, 30:130-140.
3. Muller U, Roeder C, Dubs L, Duetz MS, Greenough CG: Condition-specific outcome measures for low back pain. Part II: Scale construction. Eur Spine J 2004, 13:314-324.
4. Muller U, Duetz MS, Roeder C, Greenough CG: Condition-specific outcome measures for low back pain. Part I: Validation. Eur Spine J 2004, 13:301-313.
5. Schaufele MK, Boden SD: Outcome research in patients with chronic low back pain. Orthop Clin North Am 2003, 34:231-237.
6. Guyatt GH, Kirshner B, Jaeschke R: Measuring health status: what are the necessary measurement properties? J Clin Epidemiol 1992, 45:1341-1345.
7. Deyo RA, Diehr P, Patrick DL: Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin Trials 1991, 12:142S-158S.
8. Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Michel BA, Stucki G: Minimal clinically important rehabilitation effects in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. J Rheumatol 2002, 29:131-138.
9. Guyatt G, Walter S, Norman G: Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chronic Dis 1987, 40:171-178.
10. Kirshner B, Guyatt G: A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chronic Dis 1985, 38:27-36.
11. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Katz JN, Wright JG: A taxonomy for responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 2001, 54:1204-1217.
12. Terwee CB, Dekker FW, Wiersinga WM, Prummel MF, Bossuyt PM: On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation. Qual Life Res 2003, 12:349-362.
13. Norman GR, Sridhar FG, Guyatt GH, Walter SD: Relation of distribution- and anchor-based approaches in interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life. Med Care 2001, 39:1039-1047.
14. Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD: Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol 2000, 53:459-468.
15. Lassere MN, van der Heijde D, Johnson KR: Foundations of the minimal clinically important difference for imaging. J Rheumatol 2001, 28:890-891.
16. Wells G, Beaton D, Shea B, Boers M, Simon L, Strand V, Brooks P, Tugwell P: Minimal clinically important differences: review of methods. J Rheumatol 2001, 28:406-412.
17. Crosby RD, Kolotkin RL, Williams GR: Defining clinically meaningful change in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 2003, 56:395-407.
18. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH: Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989, 10:407-415.
19. Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, Wyrwich KW, Norman GR: Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clin Proc 2002, 77:371-383.
20. Wright JG, Young NL: A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 1997, 50:239-246.
21. Beaton DE: Understanding the relevance of measured change through studies of responsiveness. Spine 2000, 25:3192-3199.
22. Norman GR, Stratford P, Regehr G: Methodological problems in the retrospective computation of responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach. J Clin Epidemiol 1997, 50:869-879.
23. Scrimshaw SV, Maher C: Responsiveness of visual analogue and McGill pain scale measures. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2001, 24:501-504.
24. Bolton JE, Wilkinson RC: Responsiveness of pain scales: a comparison of three pain intensity measures in chiropractic patients. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1998, 21:1-7.
25. Beaton DE, Hogg-Johnson S, Bombardier C: Evaluating changes in health status: reliability and responsiveness of five generic health status measures in workers with musculoskeletal disorders. J Clin Epidemiol 1997, 50:79-93.
26. Davidson M, Keating JL: A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness. Phys Ther 2002, 82:8-24.
27. Fritz JM, Irrgang JJ: A comparison of a modified Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale. Phys Ther 2001, 81:776-788.
28. Bronfort G, Bouter LM: Responsiveness of general health status in chronic low back pain: a comparison of the COOP charts and the SF-36. Pain 1999, 83:201-209.
29. Wittink H, Turk DC, Carr DB, Sukiennik A, Rogers W: Comparison of the redundancy, reliability, and responsiveness to change among SF-36, Oswestry Disability Index, and Multidimensional Pain Inventory. Clin J Pain 2004, 20:133-142.
30. Chansirinukor W, Maher CG, Latimer J, Hush J: Comparison of the functional rating index and the 18-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire: responsiveness and reliability. Spine 2005, 30:141-145.
31. Stratford PW, Binkley J, Solomon P, Finch E, Gill C, Moreland J: Defining the minimum level of detectable change for the Roland-Morris questionnaire. Phys Ther 1996, 76:359-365.
32. Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL, Guyatt GH: Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 1. Phys Ther 1998, 78:1186-1196.
33. Riddle DL, Stratford PW, Binkley JM: Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 2. Phys Ther 1998, 78:1197-1207.
34. Grotle M, Brox JI, Vollestad NK: Concurrent comparison of responsiveness in pain and functional status measurements used for patients with low back pain. Spine 2004, 29:E492-E501.
35. Leclaire R, Blier F, Fortin L, Proulx R: A cross-sectional study comparing the Oswestry and Roland-Morris Functional Disability scales in two populations of patients with low back pain of different levels of severity. Spine 1997, 22:68-71.
36. Hägg O, Fritzell P, Oden A, Nordwall A: Simplifying outcome measurement: evaluation of instruments for measuring outcome after fusion surgery for chronic low back pain. Spine 2002, 27:1213-1222.
37. Taylor SJ, Taylor AE, Foy MA, Fogg AJ: Responsiveness of common outcome measures for patients with low back pain. Spine 1999, 24:1805-1812.
38. Walsh TL, Hanscom B, Lurie JD, Weinstein JN: Is a condition-specific instrument for patients with low back pain/leg symptoms really necessary? The responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index, MODEMS, and the SF-36. Spine 2003, 28:607-615.
39. Turner JA, Fulton-Kehoe D, Franklin G, Wickizer TM, Wu R: Comparison of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and generic health status measures: a population-based study of workers' compensation back injury claimants. Spine 2003, 28:1061-1067.
40. Garratt AM, Klaber MJ, Farrin AJ: Responsiveness of generic and specific measures of health outcome in low back pain. Spine 2001, 26:71-77.
41. Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Koke AJ: Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments. Pain 1996, 65:71-76.
42. Kuijer W, Brouwer S, Dijkstra PU, Jorritsma W, Groothoff JW, Geertzen JH: Responsiveness of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire: consequences of using different external criteria. Clin Rehabil 2005, 19:488-495.
43. Pengel LH, Refshauge KM, Maher CG: Responsiveness of pain, disability, and physical impairment outcomes in patients with low back pain. Spine 2004, 29:879-883.
44. Bolton JE, Breen AC: The Bournemouth Questionnaire: a short-form comprehensive outcome measure. I. Psychometric properties in back pain patients. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1999, 22:503-510.
45. Wiesinger GF, Nuhr M, Quittan M, Ebenbichler G, Wolfl G, Fialka-Moser V: Cross-cultural adaptation of the Roland-Morris questionnaire for German-speaking patients with low back pain. Spine 1999, 24:1099-1103.
46. Kopec JA, Esdaile JM, Abrahamowicz M, Abenhaim L, Wood-Dauphinee S, Lamping DL, Williams JI: The Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale. Measurement properties. Spine 1995, 20:341-352.
47. Boscainos PJ, Sapkas G, Stilianessi E, Prouskas K, Papadakis SA: Greek versions of the Oswestry and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaires. Clin Orthop 2003:40-53.
48. Fujiwara A, Kobayashi N, Saiki K, Kitagawa T, Tamai K, Saotome K: Association of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score with the Oswestry Disability Index, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, and short-form 36. Spine 2003, 28:1601-1607.
49. Grotle M, Brox JI, Vollestad NK: Cross-cultural adaptation of the Norwegian versions of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Index. J Rehabil Med 2003, 35:241-247.
50. Fritz JM, Piva SR: Physical impairment index: reliability, validity, and responsiveness in patients with acute low back pain. Spine 2003, 28:1189-1194.
51. Yakut E, Duger T, Oksuz C, Yorukan S, Ureten K, Turan D, Frat T, Kiraz S, Krd N, Kayhan H, Yakut Y, Guler C: Validation of the Turkish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Spine 2004, 29:581-585.
52. Mannion AF, Junge A, Grob D, Dvorak J, Fairbank JC: Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 2: sensitivity to change after spinal surgery. Eur Spine J 2006, 15:66-73.
53. Hartvigsen J, Lauridsen H, Ekstrom S, Nielsen MB, Lange F, Kofoed N, Grunnet-Nilsson N: Translation and validation of the danish version of the Bournemouth questionnaire. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2005, 28:402-407.
54. Kucukdeveci AA, Tennant A, Elhan AH, Niyazoglu H: Validation of the Turkish version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for use in low back pain. Spine 2001, 26:2738-2743.
55. Exner V, Keel P: Measuring disability of patients with low-back pain - validation of a German version of the Roland & Morris disability questionnaire. Schmerz 2000, 14:392-400.
56. Lauridsen HH, Hartvigsen J, Manniche C, Korsholm L, Grunnet-Nilsson N: Danish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Part 1: Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity in two different populations. Eur Spine J 2006.
57. Lauridsen HH, Hartvigsen J, Manniche C, Korsholm L, Grunnet-Nilsson N: 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.
58. Lonnberg F: The management of back problems among the population. I. Contact patterns and therapeutic routines. Ugeskr Laeger 1997, 159:2207-2214 [In Danish].
59. Fairbank J, Pynsent PB, Disney S: The Oswestry Disability Index. 2006 [http://www.orthosurg.org.uk/odi/].
60. Roland M, Fairbank J: The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Spine 2000, 25:3115-3124.
61. Patrick DL, Deyo RA, Atlas SJ, Singer DE, Chapin A, Keller RB: Assessing health-related quality of life in patients with sciatica. Spine 1995, 20:1899-1908.
62. Roland M, Morris R: A Study of the Natural-History of Back Pain .1. Development of A Reliable and Sensitive Measure of Disability in Low-Back-Pain. Spine 1983, 8:141-144.
63. Ostelo RW, de Vet HC, Knol DL, van den Brandt PA: 24-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire was preferred out of six functional status questionnaires for post-lumbar disc surgery. J Clin Epidemiol 2004, 57:268-276.
64. Manniche C, Asmussen K, Lauritsen B, Vinterberg H, Kreiner S, Jordan A: Low Back Pain Rating scale: validation of a tool for assessment of low back pain. Pain 1994, 57:317-326.
65. McHorney CA, Ware JEJ, Rogers W, Raczek AE, Lu JF: The validity and relative precision of MOS short- and long-form health status scales and Dartmouth COOP charts. Results from the Medical Outcomes Study. Med Care 1992, 30:MS253-MS265.
66. Bjorner JB, Damsgaard MT, Watt T, Bech P, Rasmussen NK, Modvig J, Thunedborg K: Danish Manual to the SF36 Edited by: Bjorner JB. LIF, Lægemiddelindutriforeningen; 1997.
67. Williamson A, Hoggart B: Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs 2005, 14:798-804.
68. Childs JD, Piva SR, Fritz JM: Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine 2005, 30:1331-1334.
69. Fischer D, Stewart AL, Bloch DA, Lorig K, Laurent D, Holman H: Capturing the patient's view of change as a clinical outcome measure. JAMA 1999, 282:1157-1162.
70. Guyatt GH, Berman LB, Townsend M, Taylor DW: Should study subjects see their previous responses. J Chronic Dis 1985, 38:1003-1007.
71. Guyatt GH, Townsend M, Keller JL, Singer J: Should study subjects see their previous responses - data from a randomized control trial. J Clin Epidemiol 1989, 42:913-920.
72. Albert HB, Jensen AM, Dahl D, Rasmussen MN: Criteria validation of the Roland Morris questionnaire. A Danish translation of the international scale for the assessment of functional level in patients with low back pain and sciatica. Ugeskr Laeger 2003, 165:1875-1880 [In Danish].
73. Bjorner JB, Thunedborg K, Kristensen TS, Modvig J, Bech P: The Danish SF-36 Health Survey: translation and preliminary validity studies. J Clin Epidemiol 1998, 51:991-999.
74. Bjorner JB, Kreiner S, Ware JE, Damsgaard MT, Bech P: Differential item functioning in the Danish translation of the SF-36. J Clin Epidemiol 1998, 51:1189-1202.
75. Bjorner JB, Damsgaard MT, Watt T, Groenvold M: Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability of the Danish SF-36. J Clin Epidemiol 1998, 51:1001-1011.
76. McHorney CA, Ware JEJ, Raczek AE: The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care 1993, 31:247-263.
77. McHorney CA, Ware JEJ, Lu JF, Sherbourne CD: The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): III. Tests of data quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Med Care 1994, 32:40-66.
78. Ware JEJ, Sherbourne CD: The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992, 30:473-483.
79. Bombardier C, Hayden J, Beaton DE: Minimal clinically important difference. Low back pain: outcome measures. J Rheumatol 2001, 28:431-438.
80. Farrar JT, Young JPJ, LaMoreaux L, Werth JL, Poole RM: Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain 2001, 94:149-158.
81. Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF: Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989, 27:S178-S189.
82. Bolton JE: Sensitivity and specificity of outcome measures in patients with neck pain: detecting clinically significant improvement. Spine 2004, 29:2410-2417.
83. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ: An Introduction to the Bootstrap 1st ed. edition. New York, Chapman and Hall; 1993.
84. Phillips PCB, Park JY: On the formulation of wald tests of nonlinear restrictions. Econometrica 1988, 56:1065-1083.
85. Deyo RA, Centor RM: Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis 1986, 39:897-906.
86. Hanley JA: Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) methodology: the state of the art. Crit Rev Diagn Imaging 1989, 29:307-335.
87. de Vet HC, Bouter LM, Bezemer PD, Beurskens AJ: Reproducibility and responsiveness of evaluative outcome measures. Theoretical considerations illustrated by an empirical example. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2001, 17:479-487.
88. DeLong ER, DeLong DM, Clarke-Pearson DL: Comparing the areas under two or more correlated receiver operating characteristic curves: a nonparametric approach. Biometrics 1988, 44:837-845.
89. Farrar JT, Portenoy RK, Berlin JA, Kinman JL, Strom BL: Defining the clinically important difference in pain outcome measures. Pain 2000, 88:287-294.
90. Coste J, Delecoeuillerie G, Cohen L, Le Parc JM, Paolaggi JB: Clinical course and prognostic factors in acute low back pain: an inception cohort study in primary care practice. BMJ 1994, 308:577-580.
91. Stratford PW, Binkley JM: Measurement properties of the RM-18. A modified version of the Roland-Morris Disability Scale. Spine 1997, 22:2416-2421.
92. Suarez-Almazor ME, Kendall C, Johnson JA, Skeith K, Vincent D: Use of health status measures in patients with low back pain in clinical settings. Comparison of specific, generic and preference-based instruments. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2000, 39:783-790.
93. Jette DU, Jette AM: Physical therapy and health outcomes in patients with spinal impairments. Phys Ther 1996, 76:930-941.
94. Stratford PW, Binkley J, Solomon P, Gill C, Finch E: Assessing change over time in patients with low back pain. Phys Ther 1994, 74:528-533.
95. Wells G, Anderson J, Beaton D, Bellamy N, Boers M, Bombardier C, Breedveld F, Carr A, Cranney A, Dougados M, Felson D, Kirwan J, Schiff M, Shea B, Simon L, Smolen J, Strand V, Tugwell P, van Riel P, Welch VA: Minimal clinically important difference module: summary, recommendations, and research agenda. J Rheumatol 2001, 28:452-454.
96. Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA: Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2002, 14:109-114.
97. Stratford PW, Binkley FM, Riddle DL: Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. Phys Ther 1996, 76:1109-1123.
98. Stratford PW, Spadoni G, Kennedy D, Westaway MD, Alcock GK: Seven points to consider when investigating a measure's ability to detect change. Physiother Can 2002, 54:16-24.
99. Stratford PW, Riddle DL: Assessing sensitivity to change: choosing the appropriate change coefficient. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2005, 3:23.
100. Hägg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A: The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 2003, 12:12-20.
101. Davidson M, Keating JL, Eyres S: A low back-specific version of the SF-36 Physical Functioning scale. Spine 2004, 29:586-594.
102. Ostelo RW, de Vet HC: Clinically important outcomes in low back pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2005, 19:593-607.
103. Finch E, Brooks D, Stratford P, Mayo NE: Physical Rehabilitation Outcome Measures 2nd. edition edition. BC Decker Inc.; 2002:180-181.
104. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, Gotzsche PC, Lang T: The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001, 134:663-694.
105. Guyatt GH, Norman GR, Juniper EF, Griffith LE: A critical look at transition ratings. J Clin Epidemiol 2002, 55:900-908.
106. Hägg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A: Simplifying outcome measurement. Eur Spine J 2005, 14:S1-S30.