The reliability and concurrent validity of the Scoliosis Research Society-22r patient questionnaire compared with the Child Health Questionnaire-CF87 patient questionnaire for adolescent spinal deformity

Spine

Volumn 32, Issue 16, 2007, Pages 1778-1784

  Glattes, R Christopher ^a   Burton, Douglas C ^a   Lai, Sue Min ^b   Frasier, Elizabeth ^a   Asher, Marc A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Health related quality of life questionnaires; Idiopathic scoliosis; Outcomes analysis; Scoliosis; Scoliosis Research Society 22r Health Related Quality of Life Questionnaire; Spine deformity

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; ARTICLE; CHILD HEALTH CARE; CONCURRENT VALIDITY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; CRONBACH ALPHA COEFFICIENT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MENTAL HEALTH; OUTPATIENT; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCHOOL CHILD; SELF CONCEPT; SPINE MALFORMATION; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; VALIDATION PROCESS;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADOLESCENT; AGE FACTORS; AGING; BACK PAIN; BODY IMAGE; CHILD; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL DISORDERS; MENTAL HEALTH; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; SCOLIOSIS; STATISTICS;

EID: 34447528927     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3180dc9bb2     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Haher TR, Gorup JM, Shin TM, et al. Scoliosis Research Society instrument for evaluation of surgical outcome in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a multicenter study of 244 patients. Spine 1999;24:1435-40.
2. Helenius I, Lamberg T, Österman K, et al. Scoliosis Research Society outcome instrument in evaluation of long-term surgical results in spondylolysis and low-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis in young patients. Spine 2005;30:336-41.
3. Merola AA, Haher TR, Brkaric M, et al. A multicenter study of the outcomes of the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcome instrument. Spine 2002;27:2046-51.
4. Watanabe K, Hasegawa K, Hirano T, et al. Use of the Scoliosis Research Society outcome instrument to evaluate patient outcome in untreated idiopathic scoliosis patients in Japan: I. Comparison with nonscoliosis group: preliminary/limited review in a Japanese population. Spine 2005;30:1197-201.
5. Watanabe K, Hasegawa K, Hirano T, et al. Use of the Scoliosis Research Society outcomes instrument to evaluate patient outcome in untreated idiopathic scoliosis patients in Japan: II. Relation between spinal deformity and patient outcomes. Spine 2005;30:1202-5.
6. White SF, Asher MA, Lai S-M, Burton DC. Patients perceptions of overall function, pain and appearance following primary posterior instrumentation and fusion for idiopathic scoliosis (IS). Spine 1999;24:1693-9.
7. Wilson PL, Newton PO, Wenger DR, et al. A multicenter study analyzing the relationship of a standardized radiographic scoring system of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and the Scoliosis Research Society outcomes instrument. Spine 2002;27:2036-40.
8. Asher MA, Lai SM, Burton DC. Further development and validation of the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcomes instrument. Spine 2000;25:2381-6.
9. Berven S, Deviren V, Demir-Deviren S, et al. Studies in the modified Scoliosis Research Society outcomes instrument in adults: validation, reliability and discriminatory capacity. Spine 2003;28:2164-9.
10. Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, et al. The reliability and concurrent validity of the SRS-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2003;28:63-9.
11. Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, et al. Scoliosis Research Society-22 patient questionnaire responsiveness to change associated with surgical treatment. Spine 2003;28:70-3.
12. Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, et al. Discrimination validity of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 patient questionnaire: relationship to idiopathic scoliosis (IS) curve pattern and curve size. Spine 2003;28:74-8.
13. Bridwell KH, Cats-Baril W, Harrast J, et al. The validity of the SRS-22 instrument in an adult spinal deformity population compared with the Oswestry and SF-12. Spine 2005;30:455-61.
14. Monticone M, Carabalona R, Negrini S. Reliability of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 questionnaire (Italian version) in mild adolescent vertebral deformity. Eur Med Phys 2004;40:191-7.
15. Bago J, Climent JM, Ey A, et al. The Spanish version of the SRS-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis: transcultural adaptation and reliability analysis. Spine 2004;29:1676-80.
16. Climent JM, Bago J, Ey A, et al. Validity of the Spanish version of the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS-22) patient questionnaire. Spine 2005;30:705-9.
17. Alanay A, Cil A, Berk H, et al. Reliability and validity of adapted Turkish version of Scoliosis Research Society (SRS-22) questionnaire. Spine 2005;30:2464-8.
18. Asher MA, Lai SM, Glattes RC, et al. Refinement of the SRS-22 health-related quality of life questionnaire function domain. Spine 2006;31:593-7.
19. Bago J, Climent JM, Ey A, et al. Letter to the editor re Asher et al. Refinement of the SRS-22 health-related quality of life questionnaire function domain. Spine 2006;31:1758.
20. Landgraf JM, Abetz L, Ware JE. The CHQ User's Manual. Boston: Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1996.
21. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951;16:297-334.
22. Howard KI, Forehand GG. A method for correcting item-total for the effect of relevant item inclusion. Educ Psychol Meas 1963;33:40-6.
23. Ross B. Fundamentals of Biostatistics. New York: Duxbury Press; 1995:518-9.
24. Indrayan A, Sarmukaddam SB. Medical Biostatistics. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2001:478-98.
25. Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware JE. The MOS short-form general health survey: reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care 1998;26:724-32.
26. Ware JE, Sherbourne D. TheMOS36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473-83.
27. Ware JE. SF-36 Health Survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide, 2nd ed. Boston: Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1997.
28. Lai SM, Asher MA, Burton DC. Estimating SRS-22 quality of life measures with SF-36: application in idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2006;31:473-8.
29. Mehlman CT, Wall EJ, Foad SL. Patients who've been told they have scoliosis score the same on the SRS-22 as scoliosis patients requiring treatment. Eur Spine J 2005;14(suppl 1):6-7.
30. Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, et al. The influence of spine and trunk deformity on pre-operative idiopathic scoliosis patients' health-related quality of life questionnaire responses. Spine 2004;29:861-8.
31. Freidel K, Peterman F, Reichel D, et al. Quality of life in women with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2002;27:E87-91.
32. Vasiliadis E, Grivas TB, Savvidou O, et al. The influence of brace on quality of life of adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. In: Uyttendaele D, Dangerfield PH, eds. Research Into Spinal Deformities, vol. 5. Amsterdam: IOS Press; 2006:352-6.
33. D'Andrea LP, Betz RR, Lenke LG, et al. Do radiographic parameters correlate with clinical outcomes in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Spine 2000;25:1795-802.
34. Hussain N, Freeman BJC, Watkins R, et al. Does the SRS-22 outcome questionnaire correlate with radiological outcome following anterior correction of thoraco-lumbar scoliosis? Eur Spine J 2005;14(suppl 1):6.
35. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, et al. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000;25:3186-91.