Outcome assessment in lumbar spine surgery

References

• Atlas S J, Deyo R A, Keller R B, et al. The Maine Lumbar Spine Study, Part III. Spine 1996; 21: 1787–94, 1-year outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis, discussion 94–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atlas S J, Keller R B, Robson D, et al. Surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 2000; 25: 556–62
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaton D E, Bombardier C, Katz J N, Wright J G, Wells G, Boers M, Strand V, Shea B. Looking for important change/differences in studies of responsiveness. J Rheumatol 2001; 28(2)400–5, OMERACT MCID Working Group. Outcome Measures in Rheumatology. Minimal Clinically Important Difference
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beaton D E. Understanding the relevance of measured change through studies of responsiveness. Spine 2000; 25(24)3192–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bombardier C, Hayden J, Beaton D E. Minimal clinically important difference. Low back pain: outcome measures. J Rheumatol 2001; 28(2)431–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Browaeys M J. Complexity of epistemology: Theory of knowledge or philosophy of science?. Fourth Annual Meeting of the European Chaos and Complexity in Organisations Network (ECCON). Driebergen 2004, URL: http://www.chaosforum.com/nieuws/CofE.pdf (visited 2005 March 18th)
   Google Scholar
• Brox J I, Sorensen R, Friis A, Nygaard O, Indahl A, Keller A, Ingebrigtsen T, Eriksen H R, Holm I, Koller A K, Riise R, Reikeras O. Randomized clinical trial of lumbar instrumented fusion and cognitive intevention and exercises in patients with chronic low back pain and disc degeneration. Spine 2003; 28(17)1913–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chatman A B, Hyams S P, Neel J M, Binkley J M, Stratford P W, Schomberg A, Stabler M. The Patient-specific Functional Scale: measurement properties in patients with knee dysfunction. Phys Ther 1997; 77(8)820–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conover W J. Practical Nonparametric Statistics. John Wiley and Sons, New York 1980, cit. in Bland M. An Introduction to Medical Statistics. Oxford University Press, 2000
   Google Scholar
• Davidson M, Keating J L, Eyres S. A low back-specific version of the SF-36 Physical Functioning scale. Spine 2004; 29(5)586–94
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deyo R, Cherkin D, Loeser J, Bigos S, Ciol M. Morbidity and mortality in association with operations on the lumbar spine. J Bone Joint Surg 1992; 74-A: 536–43, The influence of age, diagnosis, and procedure
   Google Scholar
• Deyo R A, Nachemson A, Mirza S K. Spinal-fusion surgery – the case for restraint. N Engl J Med 2004; 350(7)722–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Draper S W. The Hawthorne effect [WWW document]. February 2nd, 2005, URL: http://www.psy.gla.ac.uk/∼steve/hawth.html (visited 2005 March 18th)
   Google Scholar
• Dunbar M J, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L. Appropriate questionnaires for knee arthroplasty. Results of a survey of 3600 patients from The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001; 83(3)339–44
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dunbar M J, Robertsson O, Ryd L. What's all that noise? The effect of co-morbidity on health outcome questionnaire results after knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand 2004; 75(2)119–2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunbar M J. Subjective outcomes after knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand 2001; 72(Suppl 301)1–63
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Evans J H, Kagan A, 2d. The development of a functional rating scale to measure the treatment outcome of chronic spinal patients. Spine 1986; 11(3)277–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairbank J. Point of view on: Validation of the Turkishaversion of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Spine 2004; 29(5)585
   Google Scholar
• Fairbank J C, Frost H, Wilson-MacDonald J, Yu L M, Barker K, Collins R. The MRC Spine Stabilisation Trial. A randomised controlled trial to compare surgical stabilisation of the lumbar spine versus an intensive rehabilitation programme on outcome in patients with chronic low back pain. Spine Week Porto 2004, In Abstract Book (ISSLS)
   Google Scholar
• Fanciullo G J, Hanscom B, Weinstein J N, Chawarski M C, Jamison R N, Baird J C. Cluster analysis classification of SF-36 profiles for patients with spinal pain. Spine 2003; 28(19)2276–82
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fritzell P, Hagg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A. 2001 Volvo Award Winner in Clinical Studies: Lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain: a multicenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Spine 2001; 26(23)2521–32, discussion 32–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furlan A D, Clarke J, Esmail R, Sinclair S, Irvin E, Bombardier C. A critical review of reviews on the treatment of chronic low back pain. Spine 2001; 26(7)E155–62
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gartsman G M, Khan M, Hammerman S M. Arthroscopic repair of full-thickness tears of the rotator cuff. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998; 80(6)832–40
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gibson J N, Grant I C, Waddell G. The Cochrane review of surgery for lumbar disc prolapse and degenerative lumbar spondylosis. Spine 1999; 24(17)1820–32
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson J N, Waddell G, Grant I C. Surgery for degenerative lumbar spondylosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000, 3, CD001352
   Google Scholar
• Hagberg K, Branemark R, Hägg O. Questionnaire for Persons with a Transfemoral Amputation (Q-TFA): Initial validity and reliability of a new outcome measure. J Rehabil Res Dev 2004; 41(5)695–706
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hee H T, III, Whitecloud T S, 3rd, Myers L, Roesch W, Ricciardi J E. Do worker's compensation patients with neck pain have lower SF-36 scores?. Eur Spine J 2002; 11(4)375–81
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Herno A, Airaksinen O, Saari T. Long-term results of surgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 1993; 18: 1471–4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Huskisson E C. Measurement of pain. Lancet 1974; 2(7889)1127–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hägg O. Measurement and prediction of outcome. Application in fusion furgery for chronic Low-Back Pain. Göteborg University, GöteborgSweden 2002, Thesis
   Google Scholar
• Hägg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A. Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 2003; 12(1)12–20, discussion 21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jamison R N, Rock D L, Parris W CV. Empirically derived Symptom Checklist 90 subgroups of chronic pain patients: a cluster analysis. J Behav Med 1987; 11: 147
   Google Scholar
• Jansson K A, Nemeth G, Granath F, Blomqvist P. Surgery for herniation of a lumbar disc in Sweden between 1987 and 1999. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004; 86(6)841–7, An analysis of 27,576 operations
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jansson K-Å, Blomqvist P, Granath F, Németh G. Spinal stenosis surgery in Sweden 1987–1999. Eur Spin J 2003; 12: 535–41
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Jensen M P, Karoly P, Braver S. The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods. Pain 1986; 27: 117–26
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnsson K E, Rosen I, Uden A. The natural course of lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Orthop 1992, 279: 82–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Johnsson K E, Uden A, Rosen I. The effect of decompression on the natural course of spinal stenosis. A comparison of surgically treated and untreated patients. Spine 1991; 16: 615–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnsson R, Selvik G, Strömqvist B, Sunden G. Mobility of the lower lumbar spine after posterolateral fusion determined by roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis. Spine 1990; 15(5)347–50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller A, Brox J I, Gunderson R, Holm I, Friis A, Reikeras O. Trunk muscle strength, cross-sectional area, and density in patients with chronic low back pain randomized to lumbar fusion or cognitive intevention and exercises. Spine 2004; 29(1)3–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller R B, Atlas S J, Soule D N, Singer D E, Deyo R A. Relationship between rates and outcomes of operative treatment for lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999; 81(6)752–62
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kelly A M. Does the clinically significant difference in visual analog scale pain scores vary with gender, age, or cause of pain?. Acad Emerg Med 1998; 5(11)1086–90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linton S J, Melin L. The accuracy of remembering chronic pain. Pain 1982; 13(3)281–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Maul I, Laubli T, Klipstein A, Krueger H. Course of low back pain among nurses: a longitudinal study across eight years. Occup Environ Med 2003; 60(7)497–503
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinnon M E, Vickers M R, Ruddock V M, Townsend J, Meade T W. Community studies of the health service implications of low back pain. Spine 1997; 22(18)216–16
   Google Scholar
• Mele A, Bianco E, Torre M, Wenzel V, Romanini E, Padua R, Zanoli G. Revisione sistematica sulle protesi d'anca: affidabilità dell'impianto. Milano 2004, Istituto Superiore di Sanità – PNLG, Zadig
   Google Scholar
• Moore A, Moore O, McQuay H, Gavaghan D. Deriving dichotomous outcome measures from continuous data in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: use of pain intensity and visual analog scales. Pain 1997; 69(3)311–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morin E. La méthode: La connaissance de la connaissance. Seuil, Paris 1986
   Google Scholar
• Ostelo R W, de Vet H C, Knol D L, van den Brandt P A. 24-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire was preferred out of six functional status questionnaires for post-lumbar disc surgery. J Clin Epidemiol 2004; 57(3)268–76
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostendorf M, van Stel H F, Buskens E, Schrijvers A J, Marting L N, Verbout A J, Dhert W J. Patient-reported outcome in total hip replacement. A comparison of five instruments of health status. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004; 86(6)801–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Robertsson O. The Swedish knee arthroplasty register. Validity and Outcome. University of Lund, Lund 2000, Thesis
   Google Scholar
• Roos E. Knee Injury and Knee Osteoarthritis-Development, evaluation and clinical application of patient-relevant questionnaires. University of Lund, Lund 1999, Thesis
   Google Scholar
• Roos E M, Roos H P, Lohmander L S, Ekdahl C, Beynnon B D. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)—development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1998; 28(2)88–96
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roos H, Roos E, Ryd L. On the art of measuring. Acta Orthop Scand 1997; 68(1)3–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenthal G E, Harper D L, Quinn L M, Cooper G S. Severity-adjusted mortality and length of stay in teaching and nonteaching hospitals. JAMA 1997; 278(6)485–90, Results of a regional study
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ross M. Relation of implicit theories to the construction of personal histories. Psych Rev 1989; 96: 341–57
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schofferman J. Long-term opioid analgesic therapy for severe refractory lumbar spine pain. Clin J Pain 1999; 15(2)136–40
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Streiner D L, Norman G R. Health measurement scales. A practical guide to their development and use 2. Oxford University Press, New York 1989
   Google Scholar
• Strombeck B, Ekdahl C, Manthorpe R, Wikstrom I, Jacobsson L. Health-related quality of life in primary Sjo-gren's syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis and fibromyalgia compared to normal population data using SF-36. Scand J Rheumatol 2000; 29(1)20–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strömqvist B, Jönsson B, Fritzell P, Hägg O, Larsson B-E, Lind B. The Swedish national register for lumbar spine surgery. Acta Orthop Scand 2001; 72: 99–106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strömqvist B, Jönsson B. Computerized follow-up after surgery for degenerative lumbar spine diseases. Acta Orthop Scand 1993, Suppl 251: 138–42
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stucki G, Liang M H, Phillips C, Katz J N. The Short Form36 is preferable to the SIP as a generic health status measure in patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty. Arthritis Care Res 1995; 8(3)174–81
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sullivan M, Karlsson J, Ware J E, Hälsoenkät SF-36. Evensk Manual och Tolkningsguide (SF-36 Health survey. Swedish Manual and Interpretation Guide). Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Göteborg 1994
   Google Scholar
• Tidermark J, Bergstrom G, Svensson O, Tornkvist H, Ponzer S. Responsiveness of the EuroQol (EQ 5-D) and the SF36 in elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures. Qual Life Res 2003; 12(8)1069–79
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Todd K H, Funk K G, Funk J P, Bonacci R. Clinical significance of reported changes in pain severity. Ann Emerg Med 1996; 27(4)485–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turk D C, Rudy T E. Toward an empirically derived taxonomy of chronic pain patients: integration of psychological assessment data. J Consult Clin Psych 1988; 56: 233–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh T L, Hanscom B, Lurie J D, Weinstein J N. Is a condi-tion-specific instrument for patients with low back pain/ leg symptoms really necessary?. Spine 2003; 28(6)607–15, The responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index, MODEMS, and the SF-36
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walters S J, Brazier J E. What is the relationship between the minimally important difference and health state utility values? The case of the SF-6D. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1(1)4
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van Tulder M W, Assendelft W J, Koes B W, Bouter L M. Method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group for Spinal Disorders. Spine 1997; 22(20)2323–30
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware J E, Jr, Bjorner J B, Kosinski M. Practical implications of item response theory and computerized adaptive testing: a brief summary of ongoing studies of widely used headache impact scales. Med Care 2000; 38(9 Suppl)II73–82
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ware J E, Jr, Sherbourne C D. The MOS 36-item Short-Form health survey (SF-36). Med Care 1992; 30: 473–83, 1. Conceptual framework and item selection
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware J E, Jr. SF-36 health survey update. Spine 2000; 25(24)3130–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware J E, Snow K, Kosinski M, et al. SF-36 Health survey: Manual and Interpretation Guide. The Health Institute, Boston, MA 1993
   Google Scholar
• Vogt M T, Hanscom B, Lauerman W C, Kang J D. Influence of smoking on the health status of spinal patients: the National Spine Network database. Spine 2002; 27(3)313–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Korff M, Jensen M P, Karoly P. Assessing global pain severity by self-report in clinical and health services research. Spine 2000; 25(24)3140–51
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zanoli G, Romanini E, Padua R, Traina G C, Massari L. EBM in musculoskeletal diseases: where are we?. Acta Orthop Scand 2002; 73(Suppl 305)4–7
   Google Scholar
• Zanoli G, Strömqvist B, Jönsson B. SF-36 for outcomes assessment of spine surgery. A prospective consecutive study of 451 operated patients. Proceedings, Spineweek Oporto 2004
   Google Scholar
• Zucherman J F, Hsu K Y, Hartjen C A, Mehalic T F, Implicito D A, Martin M J, Johnson D R, 2nd, Skidmore G A, Vessa P P, Dwyer J W, Puccio S, Cauthen J C, Ozuna R M. A prospective randomized multi-center study for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with the X STOP interspinous implant: 1-year results. Eur Spine J 2004; 13(1)22–31
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar