nach oben

European Spine Journal

Erschienen in:

09.01.2017 | Review Article

Do we have the right PROMs for measuring outcomes in lumbar spinal surgery?

verfasst von: O. M. Stokes, A. A. Cole, L. M. Breakwell, A. J. Lloyd, C. M. Leonard, M. Grevitt

Erschienen in: European Spine Journal | Ausgabe 3/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have become an important part of routine auditing of outcomes in spinal surgery in the UK. PROMs can be used to help assess the quality of care provided by surgical units by determining the comparative health status of patients, before and after surgery. This study was designed to review the PROMs used to assess outcomes in spinal surgery and to determine if they are fit for the purpose.

Methods

A systematic literature search was undertaken to identify studies that reported PROMs data following lumbar spinal surgery. The PROMs that were used in each study were recorded and a separate search was undertaken to determine the evidence regarding the validity of each measure.

Results

The initial search identified 1142 abstracts, which were reduced through de-duplication, filtering and review to 58 articles, which were retrieved and reviewed in full. The search identified that the majority of studies used either the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), SF-36, Roland–Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and EQ-5D along with visual analogue scales or numeric rating scales for back and leg pain.

Conclusions

The consistent use of PROMs supports the comparison of outcomes from different studies, although there was minimal evidence regarding the specificity and sensitivity of these measures for use with lumbar spinal patients. Our review highlights the need to determine a consensus regarding the use and reporting of outcome measures within the lumbar spine literature.

NHS Commissioning D14 Complex Spinal Surgery (2014) http://www.england.nhs.uk/commissioning/spec-services/npc-crg/group-d/d14/. Accessed 22 Dec 2014

Schluessmann E, Diel P, Aghayev E et al (2009) On behalf of School of the SWISSspine Registry Group SWISSspine: a nationwide registry for health technology assessment of lumbar disc prostheses. Eur Spine J. 18:851–861CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Röder C, Chavanne A, Mannion AF, Grob D, Aebi M (2005) SSE Spine tango—content, workflow, set-up. www.eurospine.org—Spine tango. Eur Spine J 14:920–924CrossRefPubMed

British Spine Registry (2014) http://bsrcentre.org.uk/. Accessed 28 Nov 2014

The EuroQol Group (1990) EuroQol-a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 16:199–208CrossRef

Fairbank J, Pynsent P (2000) The Oswestry disability index. Spine 25:2940–2953CrossRefPubMed

NHS Commissioning Board (2013). D14 Commissioning policy. http://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/d14-comp-spinal-surg.pdf. Accessed 28 Nov 2014

Jenkinson C, Stewart-Brown S, Peterson S, Paice C (1999) Assessment of the SF-36 version 2 in the United Kingdom. J Epidemiol Commun Health 53:46–50CrossRef

Grevitt M, Khazim R, Webb J, Mulholland R, Shepperd J (1997) The short form-36 health survey questionnaire in spine surgery. J Bone Jt Surgery 79(B(1)):48–52CrossRef

10.

Mueller B, Carreon LY, Glassman SD (2013) Comparison of the EuroQol-5D with the Oswestry Disability Index, back and leg pain scores in patients with degenerative lumbar spine pathology. Spine 38:757–761CrossRefPubMed

11.

Roland M, Morris R (1983) A study of the natural history of back pain. Part I: development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine 8:141–144CrossRefPubMed

12.

Roland M, Fairbank J (2000) The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Spine 25:3115–3124CrossRefPubMed

13.

Zanoli G, Stromqvist B, Jonsson B (2001) Visual analog scales for interpretation of back and leg pain intensity in patients operated for degenerative lumbar spine disorders. Spine 26:2375–2380CrossRefPubMed

14.

Hawker GA, Mian S, Kendzerska T, French M (2011) Measures of adult pain. Arthritis Care Res 63:S240–S252CrossRef

15.

Fairbank J, Couper J, Davies J, O’Brien JP (1980) The Oswestry low back pain questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66:271–273PubMed

16.

Beurskens A, deVet HCW, Koke AJA (1996) Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments. Pain 65:71–76CrossRefPubMed

17.

Fisher K, Johnson M (1997) Validation of the Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire, its sensitivity as a measure of change following treatment and its relationship with other aspects of the chronic pain experience. Physiother Theory Pract 13:67–80CrossRef

18.

Kopec JA, Esdaile JM, Abrahamowicz M, Abenhaim L, Wood-Dauphinee S, Lamping DL et al (1996) The Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: conceptualization and development. J Clin Epidemiol 49:151–161CrossRefPubMed

19.

Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB et al (1981) The sickness impact profile: development and final revision of a health status measure. Med Care 19:787–805CrossRefPubMed

20.

Williamson A, Hoggart B (2005) Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs 14:798–804CrossRefPubMed

21.

Childs JD, Piva SR, Fritz J (2005) Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine 30:1331–1334CrossRefPubMed

22.

Deyo R, Battie M, Beurskens A, Bombardier C, Croft P, Koes B, Malmivaara A, Roland M, Korff M, Waddell G (1998) Outcome measures for low back pain research. A proposal for standardized use. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 23:2003–2013CrossRef

23.

Mannion AF, Porchet F, Kleinstück FS, Lattig F, Jeszenszky D, Bartanusz V, Dvorak J, Grob D (2009) The quality of spine surgery from the patient’s perspective. Part 1: the Core Outcome Measures Index in clinical practice. Eur Spine J 18(Suppl 3):367–373CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Mannion AF, Elfering A, Staerkle R, Junge A, Grob D, Semmer NK, Jacobshagen N, Dvorak J, Boos N (2005) Outcome assessment in low back pain: how low can you go? Eur Spine J 14:1014–1026CrossRefPubMed

25.

Stucki G, Daltroy LH, Liang MH, Lipson SJ, Fossel AH, Katz JN (1996) Measurement properties of a self-administered outcome measure in lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 21:796–803CrossRefPubMed

26.

Pratt RK, Fairbank JC, Virr A (2002) The reliability of the Shuttle Walking Test, the Swiss Spinal Stenosis Questionnaire, the Oxford Spinal Stenosis Score, and the Oswestry Disability Index in the assessment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 27(1):84–91CrossRefPubMed

27.

Comer CM, Conaghan PG, Tennant A (2011) Internal construct validity of the Swiss Spine Stenosis Questionnaire: Rasch analysis of a disease-specific outcome measure for lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36(23):1969–1976CrossRef

28.

Daltroy LH, Cats-Baril WL, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Liang MH (1996) The North American spine society lumbar spine outcome assessment instrument: reliability and validity tests. Spine 21(6):741–748CrossRefPubMed

29.

Sarasqueta C, Gabaldon O, Iza I, Béland F, Paz PM (2005) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the NASS outcomes instrument in Spanish patients with low back pain. Eur Spine J 14(6):586–594CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Stoll T, Huber E, Bachmann S, Baumeler HR, Mariacher S, Rutz M, Schneider W, Spring H, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G, Steiner W (2004) Validity and sensitivity to change of the NASS questionnaire for patients with cervical spine disorders. Spine 29(24):2851–2855CrossRefPubMed

31.

Beyer F et al (2013) Percutaneous interspinous spacer versus open decompression: a 2-year follow-up of clinical outcome and quality of life. Eur Spine J 22(9):2015–2021CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Kleinstueck FS et al (2012) To fuse or not to fuse in lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: do baseline symptoms help provide the answer? Eur Spine J 21(2):268–275CrossRefPubMed

33.

Kleinstueck FS et al (2011) The outcome of decompression surgery for lumbar herniated disc is influenced by the level of concomitant preoperative low back pain. Eur Spine J 20(7):1166–1173CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

34.

Sobottke R et al (2010) Clinical outcomes and quality of life 1 year after open microsurgical decompression or implantation of an interspinous stand-alone spacer. Minim Invasive Neurosurg 53(4):179–183CrossRefPubMed

35.

Grob D et al (2010) A comparison of outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty and fusion in everyday clinical practice: surgical and methodological aspects. Eur Spine J 19(2):297–306CrossRefPubMed

36.

Kleinstück FS et al (2009) The influence of preoperative back pain on the outcome of lumbar decompression surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34(11):1198–1203CrossRef

37.

Rothman M, Burke L, Erickson P, Leidy NK, Patrick DL, Petrie CD (2009) Use of existing patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments and their modification: the ISPOR good research practices for evaluating and documenting content validity for the use of existing instruments and their modification PRO task force report. Value Health 12:1075–1083CrossRefPubMed

38.

Stratford P, Binkley J (1997) Measurement properties of the RM-18: a modified version of the Roland–Morris Disability Scale. Spine 22:2416–2421CrossRefPubMed

39.

Patrick D, Deyo R, Atlas S et al (1995) Assessing health-related quality of life inpatients with sciatica. Spine 20:1899–1909CrossRefPubMed

40.

Underwood M, Barnett A, Vicker M (1999) Evaluation of two time-specific back pain outcome measures. Spine 24:1104–1112CrossRefPubMed

41.

Walsh TL, Hanscom B, Lurie JD, Weinstein JN (2003) Is a condition-specific instrument for patients with low back pain/leg symptoms really necessary? Spine 28:607–615PubMed

42.

Garratt A, Moffett J, Farrin A (2001) Responsiveness of generic and specific measures of health outcome in low back pain. Spine 26:71–77CrossRefPubMed

43.

Rihn JA, Berven S, Allen T, Phillips FM, Currier BL, Glassman SD et al (2009) Defining value in spine care. Am J Med Qual 24:4S–14SCrossRefPubMed

44.

Hägg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A (2003) The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12:12–20PubMed

45.

Haefeli M, Elfering A, Aebi M, Freeman BJ, Fritzell P, Guimaraes Consciencia J et al (2008) What comprises a good outcome in spinal surgery? A preliminary survey among spine surgeons of the SSE and European spine patients. Eur Spine J 17:104–116CrossRefPubMed

46.

Godil SS, Parker SL, Zuckerman SL, Mendenhall SK, Glassman SD, McGirt MJ (2014) Accurately measuring the quality and effectiveness of lumbar surgery in registry efforts: determining the most valid and responsive instruments. Spine J. 14:2885–2891CrossRefPubMed

47.

Clement RC, Welander A, Stowell C, Cha TD, Chen JL, Davies M, Fairbank JC, Foley KT, Gehrchen M, Hagg O, Jacobs WC (2015) A proposed set of metrics for standardized outcome reporting in the management of low back pain. Acta orthopaedica. 86(5):523–533CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

48.

Turk DC, Dworkin RH, Allen RR, Bellamy N, Brandenburg N, Carr DB, Cleeland C, Dionne R, Farrar JT, Galer BS, Hewitt DJ, Jadad AR, Katz NP, Kramer LD, Manning DC, McCormick CG, McDermott MP, McGrath P, Quessy S, Rappaport BA, Robinson JP, Royal MA, Simon L, Stauffer JW, Stein W, Tollett J, Witter J (2003) Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain 106:337–345CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Do we have the right PROMs for measuring outcomes in lumbar spinal surgery?
verfasst von: O. M. Stokes
A. A. Cole
L. M. Breakwell
A. J. Lloyd
C. M. Leonard
M. Grevitt
Publikationsdatum: 09.01.2017
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Spine Journal / Ausgabe 3/2017
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4938-x

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen.
» Jetzt entdecken

Neu im Fachgebiet Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Notfall-TEP der Hüfte ist auch bei 90-Jährigen machbar

26.04.2024 Hüft-TEP Nachrichten

Ob bei einer Notfalloperation nach Schenkelhalsfraktur eine Hemiarthroplastik oder eine totale Endoprothese (TEP) eingebaut wird, sollte nicht allein vom Alter der Patientinnen und Patienten abhängen. Auch über 90-Jährige können von der TEP profitieren.

Arthroskopie kann Knieprothese nicht hinauszögern

25.04.2024 Gonarthrose Nachrichten

Ein arthroskopischer Eingriff bei Kniearthrose macht im Hinblick darauf, ob und wann ein Gelenkersatz fällig wird, offenbar keinen Unterschied.

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

25.04.2024 Hypertonie Nachrichten

Beginnen ältere Männer im Pflegeheim eine Antihypertensiva-Therapie, dann ist die Frakturrate in den folgenden 30 Tagen mehr als verdoppelt. Besonders häufig stürzen Demenzkranke und Männer, die erstmals Blutdrucksenker nehmen. Dafür spricht eine Analyse unter US-Veteranen.

Ärztliche Empathie hilft gegen Rückenschmerzen

23.04.2024 Leitsymptom Rückenschmerzen Nachrichten

Personen mit chronischen Rückenschmerzen, die von einfühlsamen Ärzten und Ärztinnen betreut werden, berichten über weniger Beschwerden und eine bessere Lebensqualität.

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2017

Gender differences after lumbar sequestrectomy: a prospective clinical trial using quantitative sensory testing

Herniectomy versus herniectomy with the DIAM spinal stabilization system in patients with sciatica and concomitant low back pain: results of a prospective randomized controlled multicenter trial

A randomised controlled trial of transforaminal endoscopic discectomy vs microdiscectomy

Repairing the ruptured annular fibrosus by using type I collagen combined with citric acid, EDC and NHS: an in vivo study

Radiation exposure using the O-arm® surgical imaging system

Radiological and clinical outcomes of novel Ti/PEEK combined spinal fusion cages: a systematic review and preclinical evaluation