Score distribution of the Scoliosis Quality of Life Index questionnaire in different subgroups of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

Spine

Volumn 32, Issue 16, 2007, Pages 1767-1777

  Parent, Eric C ^a,b   Hill, Doug ^b   Moreau, Marc ^b   Mahood, Jim ^b   Raso, Jim ^b   Lou, Edmond ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b GLENROSE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

Ceiling effect; Health related quality of life; Outcome measure; Questionnaire; Scoliosis; SQLI

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; AGE DISTRIBUTION; ARTICLE; BACKACHE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS; LUMBAR SPINE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE INDEX; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCHOOL CHILD; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF ESTEEM; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; THORACIC SPINE; THORACOLUMBAR SPINE;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; ADOLESCENT; AGE FACTORS; AGING; BACK PAIN; CHILD; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MENTAL HEALTH; MOOD DISORDERS; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; SCOLIOSIS; SELF CONCEPT; SPINE;

EID: 34447536403     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3180b9f7a5     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. National Scoliosis Foundation. Information and Support. http://www.scoliosis.org/info.php (Accessed February 14, 2006).
2. Asher MA, Min LS, Burton DC. Further development and validation of the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcomes instrument. Spine 2000;25:2381-6.
3. Asher M, Min LS, Burton D, et al. The reliability and concurrent validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2003;28:63-9.
4. Loder RT, Spiegel D, Gutknecht S, et al. The assessment of intraobserver and interobserver error in the measurement of noncongenital scoliosis in children < or = 10 years of age. Spine 2004;29:2548-53.
5. 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.
6. White SF, Asher MA, Lai SM, et al. Patients' perceptions of overall function, pain, and appearance after primary posterior instrumentation and fusion for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 1999;24:1693-9.
7. Haher TR, Gorup JM, Shin TM, et al. Results of the Scoliosis Research Society instrument for evaluation of surgical outcome in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a multicenter study of 244 patients. Spine 1999;24:1435-40.
8. Asher M, Min LS, Burton D, et al. Discrimination validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire: relationship to idiopathic scoliosis curve pattern and curve size. Spine 2003;28:74-8.
9. Asher M, Min LS, Burton D, et al. Scoliosis Research Society-22 patient questionnaire: responsiveness to change associated with surgical treatment. Spine 2003;28:70-3.
10. 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.
11. 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: a study of response distribution, concurrent validity, internal consistency, and reliability. Spine 2005;30:455-61.
12. Parent EC, Hill D, Mahood J, et al. Discriminative and predictive validity of Scoliosis Research Society-22 questionnaire for management and curve severity subgroups with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. 41st annual meeting of the Scoliosis Research Society, 2006.
13. Feise RJ, Donaldson S, Crowther ER, et al. Construction and validation of the scoliosis quality of life index in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2005;30:1310-5.
14. Parent E, Moreau M, Mahood J, et al. Score distribution and discriminative validity of quality of life scores in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. 6th Annual Canadian Spine Society Meeting, 2006.
15. Spinal Deformity Study Group. Spinal Deformity Study Group Radiographic Measurement Manual. Memphis, TN: Medtronic Sofamor Danek; 2004.
16. SAS Institute Inc. SAS/STAT 9.1 User's Guide. Cary, NC: SAS; 2004.
17. McHorney CA, Ware JEJ, Lu JF, et al. 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.
18. Mao HF, Hsueh IP, Tang PF, et al. Analysis and comparison of the psychometric properties of three balance measures for stroke patients. Stroke 2002;33:1022-7.
19. Raat H, Botterweck AM, Landgraf JM, et al. Reliability and validity of the short form of the child health questionnaire for parents (CHQ-PF28) in large random school based and general population samples. J Epidemiol Community Health 2005;59:75-82.
20. Holmes WC, Shea JA. Performance of a new, HIV/AIDS-targeted quality of life (HAT-QoL) instrument in asymptomatic seropositive individuals. Qual Life Res 1997;6:561-71.
21. 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.
22. Vitale MG, Levy DE, Johnson MG, et al. Assessment of quality of life in adolescent patients with orthopaedic problems: are adult measures appropriate? J Pediatr Orthop 2001;21:622-8.
23. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Katz JN, et al. A taxonomy for responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 2001;54:1204-17.
24. Liang MH. Evaluating measurement responsiveness. J Rheumatol 1995;22:1191-2.