Discriminative and predictive validity of the scoliosis research society-22 questionnaire in management and curve-severity subgroups of adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis

Spine

Volumn 34, Issue 22, 2009, Pages 2450-2457

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

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b GLENROSE REHABILITATION HOSPITAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

adolescent idiopathic scoliosis; curve severity (Cobb); Discriminative; outcome assessment; predictive value; surface topography

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; BRACE; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MENTAL HEALTH; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREDICTIVE VALIDITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RATING SCALE; SCOLIOSIS RESEARCH SOCIETY 22 QUESTIONNAIRE; SCORING SYSTEM; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; TOPOGRAPHY; TREATMENT PLANNING; ADULT; BACKACHE; CHILD; CLASSIFICATION; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DISABILITY; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; HOSPITALIZATION; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; QUESTIONNAIRE; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SCOLIOSIS; SELF CONCEPT; SELF EVALUATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPINE FUSION; STATISTICAL MODEL; STATISTICS;

ADOLESCENT; BACK PAIN; BRACES; CHILD; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DISABILITY EVALUATION; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MENTAL HEALTH; MODELS, STATISTICAL; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUESTIONNAIRES; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SCOLIOSIS; SELF ASSESSMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); SELF CONCEPT; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPINAL FUSION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 75549086959     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181af28bf     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Jackson RP, Simmons EH, Stripinis D. Coronal and sagittal plane spinal deformities correlating with back pain and pulmonary function in adult idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 1989;14:1391-7.
2. Guyatt GH. A taxonomy of health status instruments. J Rheumatol 1995; 22:1188-90.
3. 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.
4. 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. (Pubitemid 36070775)
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. Asher MA, Min LS, Burton DC. Further development and validation of the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcomes instrument. Spine 2000;25:2381-6.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Parent EC, Hill D, Moreau M, et al. Score distribution of the Scoliosis Quality of Life Index questionnaire in different subgroups of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2007;32:1767-77.
11. Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, et al. The influence of spine and trunk deformity on preoperative idiopathic scoliosis patients' health-related quality of life questionnaire responses. Spine 2004;29:861-8.
12. Glassman SD, Berven S, Bridwell K, et al. Correlation of radiographic parameters and clinical symptoms in adult scoliosis. Spine 2005;30:682-8.
13. Climent JM, Bago J, Ey A, et al. Validity of the Spanish version of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) Patient Questionnaire. Spine 2005;30:705-9.
14. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2001:1-299.
15. Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, et al. Spine deformity correlates better than trunk deformity with idiopathic scoliosis patients' quality of life questionnaire responses. Stud Health Technol Inform 2002;91:462-4.
16. Lutz GM. Understanding Social Statistics. New York, NY: MacMillan; 1983:1-530.
17. Loder RT, Spiegel D, Gutknecht S, et al. The assessment of intraobserver and interobserver error in the measurement of noncongenital scoliosis in children 10 years of age. Spine 2004;29:2548-53.
18. Raso VJ, Greenhill B, Moreau MJ, et al. The combined reconstruction of spinal and surface deformity. Surf Topogr Spinal Def 1987;13-20.
19. Berg DC, Hill DL, Raso VJ, et al. Using three-dimensional difference maps to assess changes in scoliotic deformities. Med Biol Eng Comput 2002;40:290-5.
20. Raso VJ, Lou E, Hill DL, et al. Trunk distortion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop 1998;18:222-6.
21. Hill D, Raso VJ, Moreau K, et al. Long-term follow-up of surgically treated AIS patients. Stud Health Technol Inform 2002;91:477-80.
22. Hill DL, Berg DC, Raso VJ, et al. Evaluation of a laser scanner for surface topography. Stud Health Technol Inform 2002;88:90-4.
23. Minguez MF, Buendia M, Cibrian RM, et al. Quantifier variables of the back surface deformity obtained with a noninvasive structured light method: evaluation of their usefulness in idiopathic scoliosis diagnosis. Eur Spine J 2006;16:73-82.
24. Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, et al. Maintenance of trunk deformity correction following posterior instrumentation and arthrodesis for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2004;29:1782-8.
25. Parent E, Hill D, Smetaniuk D, et al. Reliability of common surface topography parameters in adolescent with idiopathic scoliosis. Paper presented at: 62nd Annual Canadian Orthopaedic Association Meeting 2007; 2007; Halifax, Nova Scotia.
26. Parent EC, Hill DL, Mahood JK et al. Score distribution of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire in different management, and age subgroups with idiopathic scoliosis. Paper presented at: 41st Annual Scoliosis Research Society meeting 2006 (E-Poster 8); 2006; Monterey, CA.
27. Glass GV, Hopkins KD. Statistical Methods in Education and Psychology. 3rd ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon; 1995:1-674.
28. SPSS Inc. Discriminant analysis. In: SPSS Inc., ed. SPSS Base 15.0 User's Guide. 1st ed. Chicago, IL: Prentice Hall; 2006:368-75.
29. SPSS Inc. Discriminant analysis. In: SPSS, ed. SPSS Base 10.0. Chicago, IL: Prentice Hall; 2000:243-92.
30. Little DG, Song KM, Katz D, et al. Relationship of peak height velocity to other maturity indicators in idiopathic scoliosis in girls. J Bone Joint SurgAm 2000;82:685-93.
31. Richards BS, Bernstein RM, D'Amato CR, et al. Standardization of criteria for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis brace studies: SRS Committee on bracing and nonoperative management. Spine 2005;30:2068-75.
32. Berven SH, Deviren V, Polly DW Jr, et al. Minimal clinically important difference in spinal deformity: defining a threshold of change that matters. Paper presented at: Scoliosis Research Society 40th Annual Meeting, Poster 4; 2005; Miami, FL.