Advanced search
Publication Cover
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research Volume 3, 2003 - Issue 5
Submit an article Journal homepage
7
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Review

Update on the use of patient reported functional status and HRQOL measures in low back pain

Simone Crespi Merck & Co., Inc., WS2E-76, One Merck Drive, PO Box 100, Whitehouse Station, NJ 08889, USA. [email protected]
,
Elke Hunsche Merck & Co., Inc., WS2E-76, One Merck Drive, PO Box 100, Whitehouse Station, NJ 08889, USA. [email protected]
&
Dena Rosen Ramey Merck & Co., Inc., WS2E-76, One Merck Drive, PO Box 100, Whitehouse Station, NJ 08889, USA. [email protected]
Pages 599-609 | Published online: 09 Jan 2014

References

  • Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Koke AJ, van der Heijden GJ, Knipschild PG. Measuring Functional status of patients with low back pain. „loine20(9), 1017–1028 (1995).
  • Ren XS, Selim AJ, Fincke G eta]. Assessment of functional status, low back disability, and use of diagnostic imaging in patients with low back pain and radiating leg pain.' Clin. Epidemic" 52(11), 1063–1071 (1999).
  • Bombardier C. Outcome assessments in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders. Spine 25(24), 3100–3103 (2000).
  • Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJHM et al Outcome measures for low back pain research. Spine 23(18), 2003–2013 (1998).
  • Rantanen P. Physical measurements and questionnaires as diagnostic tools in chronic low back pain. I Rehab. Merl 33, 31–35 (2001).
  • Delitto A. Are measures of function and disability important in low back care? Physical Therapy 74(5), 452–462 (1994).
  • Owens DK. Patient preferences and the development of practice guidelines. Spine 23(9), 1073–1079 (1998).
  • Jacob T, Baras M, Zeev A, Epstein L. Low back pain: reliability of a set of pain measurement tools. Arch Phys. Merl Rehabil 82,735–742 (2001).
  • Underwood MR, Barnett AG, Vickers MR. Evaluation of two time-specific back pain outcome measures. Spine24(11), 1104–1112 (1999).
  • Woods-Dauphinee SL. Assessment of back related quality of life: the continuing challenge. Spine 26(8), 857–861 (2001).
  • Torenbeek M, Caulfield B, Garrett M, Van Harten W Current use of outcome measures for stroke and low back pain rehabilitation in five European countries: first results of the across project. Int. J. Rehabil Res. 24, 95–101 (2001).
  • Fritz JM, Irrigang JJ. A comparison of a modified Owestry low back pain disability questionnaire and the Quebec back pain disability scale. Phys. Ther. 81,776–788 (2001).
  • Fairbank J, Pynsent P The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 25,2940–2953 (2000).
  • Roland M, Fairbanks J. The Roland-Morris disability questionnaire and the Oswestry disability questionnaire. Spine 25(24), 3115–3124 (2000).
  • ••Recommendation to use the Roland—Morris Disability Questionnaire and Oswestry Disability Index as a primary quality of life tools in lower back pain coupled with a review of the instruments' psychometric properties.
  • Oleske DM, Andersson GBJ, Lavender SA, Hahn JJ. Association between recovery outcomes for work-related low back disorders and personal, family and work factors. Spine 25(10), 1259–1265 (2000).
  • Ohnmeiss DD, Vanharanta H, Estlander AM, Jamsen A. The relationship of disability (Oswestry) and pain drawings to functional testing. Eur. Spine J. 9,208–212 (2000).
  • Bombardier C, Hayden J, Beaton D. Minimal clinically important difference, low back pain: outcome measures. J Rheurnatol 28,431-438 (2001). Systematic review of the ability of Roland—Morris Disability Questionnaire and Oswestry Disability Index to detect changes in lower back pain patients.
  • Hanscom B, Lurie JD, Homa K, Weinstein JH. Computerized questionnaires and the quality of survey data. Spine 27(16), 1797–1801 (2002).
  • Stratford PW, Binldey JM. A comparison study of the back pain functional scale and Roland Morris questionnaire. J Rheumatol 27,1928–1936 (2000).
  • Patrick DL, Deyo RA, Atlas SJ, Singer DE, Chapin A, Keller RB. Assessing health related quality of life in patients with sciatica. Spine 20,1899–1909 (1995).
  • Jensen MP, Strom SE, Turner JA, Romano JM. Validity of the Sickness Impact Profile Roland Scale as a measure of dysfunction in chronic pain patients. Pain 50,157–162 (1992).
  • 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 22(1), 68–71 (1997).
  • Kopec JA, Esdaile JM, Abrahamowicz M etal The Quebec Back Pain Disablity Scale measurement properties. Spine 20(3), 341–352 (1995).
  • Stratford WV, Binkley JM, Riddle DL. Development and initial validation of the back pain functional scale. Spine 16,2095–2102 (2000).
  • Stratford PW, Binldey J, Solomon P, Gill C, Finch E. Assessing change over time in patients with low back pain. Phys. Therapy 74(6), 528–533 (1994).
  • Davidson M, Keating JL. A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness. Phys. Therapy 82(1), 8–24 (2002).
  • ••Examines the psychometric properties ofthe modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, the Waddell Disability Index, and the physical health scales of the MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey in patients undergoing physical therapy for low back pain.
  • Riddle DL, Stratford IW. Roland Morris scale reliability. J Am Phys. Therapy Assoc. 82(5), 515–517 (2002).
  • Kopec JA, Esaile JM, Abrahamowicz M et al The Quebec back pain disability scale: conceptualization and development. Gun. Epidemiol 49(2), 151–161 (1996).
  • Cox ME, Asselin S, Gracovetsky SA etal Relationship between functional evaluation measures and self assessment in nonacute low back pain. Spine 25(14), 1817–1826 (2000).
  • Garrott AM, Klaber Moffett J, Farrin AJ. Responsiveness of generic and specific measures of health outcomes in low back pain. Spine 26(1), 71–77 (2001).
  • Hagg 0, Fritzell P, Romber K, Nordwall A. The General Function Score: a useful tool for measurement of physical disability. Validity and reliability. Eur. Spine J. 10, 203–210 (2001).
  • Hagg 0, Fritzell P, Odén A, Nordwall A, Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Simplifying outcome measurement. Evaluation of instruments for measuring outcome after fusion surgery for chronic low back pain. Spine27 (11), 1213–1222 (2002). Comparative evaluation of lower back pain quality of life tools and a single global assessment question.
  • Harper AC, Harper DA, Lamber LJ etal Development and validation of the Curtin back screening questionnaire: a discriminative disability measure. Pain 60, 73–81 (1995).
  • Reneman MF, Jorritsma W, Schellekens JMH, Goeken LNH. Concurrent validity of questionnaire and performance based disability measurements in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain. J. Occup. Rehabil. 12(13), 119–129 (2002).
  • Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short from health survey (SF-36) Conceptual framework and item selection. Wed. Care 30(6), 473–483 (1992).
  • Walsh TL, Hanscom B, Lurie JD, Weinstein JN. Is a condition specific instrument for patients with low back pain/ leg symptoms really necessary? Spine 28(6), 607–615 (2003). Evaluation of the responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index, MODEMS scales, and all scales and summary scales of the MOS Short-Form 36 for patients with low back pain/leg symptoms.
  • Morken T, Ruse T, Moen B eta]. Frequent musculoskeletal symptoms and reduced health-related quality of life among industrial workers. Occup. Med 52(2), 91–98 (2002).
  • Hollingsworth W, Dixon AK, Todd CJ et al Self reported health status and magnetic resonance imaging findings in patients with low back pain. Eur. Spin. J 7,369–375 (1998).
  • Riddle DL, Lee KT, Stratford PW. Use of SF-36 and SF-12 health status measures. Merl Care 39(8), 867–878 (2001).
  • 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 83,201–209 (1999).
  • Taylor SJ, Taylor AE, Foy MA, Fogg AJB. Responsiveness of common outcome measures for patients with low back pain. Spine 24(17), 1805–1812 (1999).
  • Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, Gilson BS. The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Merl Care 19(8), 787–805 (1981).
  • Follick MJ, Smith TW, Ahern DK. The Sickness Impact Profile: a global measure of disability in chronic low back pain. Pain 27,67–76 (1985).
  • Nelson E, Wasson J, Kifk J et al. Assessment of function in routine clinical practice: description of the COOP chart method and preliminary findings. J. Chron. Dis. 40 (supp1.1), S55—S63 (1987).
  • Kinnersley P, Peters T, Stott N. Measuring functional health status in primary care using COOP-WONCA charts: acceptability, range of scores, construct validity, reliability and sensitivity to change. Brit. J. Gen. Frac. 44, 545–549 (1994).
  • Andres E, Temme M, Raderschatt B, Szecseny J, Sandholzer H, Kochen MM. COOP-WONCA charts: a suitable functional status screening instrument in acute low back pain? Brit. J. Gen. Prac. 45, 661–664 (1995).
  • Ruta DA, Garratt AM, Leng M, Russell IT, MacDonald LM. A new approach to the measurement of quality of life. The patient generated index. Med. Care 32(1), 1109–1126 (1994).
  • Ruta DA, Garratt AM, Russell IT Patient centred assessment of quality of life for patients with four common conditions. Qua'. Health Care 8, 22–29 (1999).
  • 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 39, 783–790 (2000).

Websites

  • www.iwh.on.ca/pages/contactinfo/ mediaroom/lowbackpain.htm. (Accessed 22, April 2003)
  • www2.cdc.gov/NORA/ NaddinfoLowBack.html (Accessed 1 May, 2003)
  • www.stoppain.org/pain_medicine/ chronic.html (Accessed 22 April, 2003)
  • www.qualitymetric.com/products/surveys/ SF36v2.shtml (Accessed June, 2003)

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Order Reprints Request Corporate Permissions

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

Request Academic Permissions

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.