Clinically important outcomes in low back pain

被引:598
作者
Ostelo, RWJG
de Vet, HCW
机构
[1] Vrije Univ Amsterdam, Ctr Med, Inst Res Extramural Med, EMGO Inst, NL-1081 BT Amsterdam, Netherlands
[2] Amsterdam Sch Allied Hlth Educ, Res Grp Allied Hlth Care, Amsterdam, Netherlands
来源
BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH IN CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY | 2005年 / 19卷 / 04期
关键词
low back pain; minimally clinically important change; questionnaires; reproducibility; validity;
D O I
10.1016/j.berh.2005.03.003
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 [临床医学]; 100201 [内科学];
摘要
Four important domains directly related to low back pain are: pain intensity, low-back-painspecific disability, patient satisfaction with treatment outcome, and work disability. Within each of the domains, different questionnaires have been proposed. This chapter focuses on validated and widely used questionnaires. Details of the background and the measurement properties, and of the minimally clinically important change (MCIC) using these questionnaires, are described. The MCIC can be estimated using various methods and there is no consensus in the literature on what the most appropriate technique is. This chapter focuses primarily on two adequate and frequently used methods for estimating the MCIC. We argue that the MCIC should not be considered as a fixed value and that the MCIC values presented in this chapter are used as indications. For patients with subacute or chronic low back pain, the MCIC for pain on a visual analogue scale (VAS) should at least be 20 mm and for acute low back pain it seems reasonable to suggest that the MCIC should at least be at the level of approximately 35 mm. If a numerical rating scale (NRS) is used it seems reasonable to suggest that the MCIC should at least be 3.5 and 2.5 for patients with acute and chronic low back pain, respectively. For functional disability as measured with the Roland Disability Questionnaire it seems reasonable that the MCIC should at least be 3.5 points, whereas an MCIC of at least 10 points when the Oswestry Disability Index is used. For global perceived effect, we argue that the MCIC is most appropriately defined in terms of at least 'much improved' or 'very satisfied', instead of including 'slightly improved'. Finally, we argue that, from the point of view of cost effectiveness, every day of earlier return to work is important. The exact value for the MCIC can be determined, taking into account the aim of the measurement, the initial scores, the target population and the method used to assess MCIC.
引用
收藏
页码:593 / 607
页数:15
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]
[Anonymous], 1996, Health measurement scales
[2]
[Anonymous], 1980, International classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps
[3]
Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research [J].
Beaton, DE ;
Boers, M ;
Wells, GA .
CURRENT OPINION IN RHEUMATOLOGY, 2002, 14 (02) :109-114
[4]
Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: A comparison of different instruments [J].
Beurskens, AJHM ;
deVet, HCW ;
Koke, AJA .
PAIN, 1996, 65 (01) :71-76
[5]
Bombardier C, 2001, J RHEUMATOL, V28, P431
[6]
Outcome assessments in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders - Summary and general recommendations [J].
Bombardier, C .
SPINE, 2000, 25 (24) :3100-3103
[7]
BOMBARDIER C, 1982, J RHEUMATOL, V9, P798
[8]
BOURBONNAIS R, 1992, BRIT J IND MED, V49, P673
[9]
Reliability of a questionnaire on sickness absence with specific attention to absence due to back pain and respiratory complaints [J].
Burdorf, A ;
Post, W ;
Bruggeling, T .
OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEDICINE, 1996, 53 (01) :58-62
[10]
ASSESSMENT OF CHRONIC PAIN .1. ASPECTS OF THE RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF THE VISUAL ANALOG SCALE [J].
CARLSSON, AM .
PAIN, 1983, 16 (01) :87-101