Comparison of patient- and clinician-reported outcome measures in lower back rehabilitation: introducing a new integrated performance measure (t2D)
-
Published:2021-06-15
Issue:1
Volume:31
Page:303-315
-
ISSN:0962-9343
-
Container-title:Quality of Life Research
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Qual Life Res
Author:
Zdravkovic Andrej, Grote VincentORCID, Pirchl Michael, Stockinger Martin, Crevenna Richard, Fischer Michael J.ORCID
Abstract
Abstract
Purpose
Patient- and clinician-reported outcome measures (PROMs, CROMs) are used in rehabilitation to evaluate and track the patient’s health status and recovery. However, controversy still exists regarding their relevance and validity when assessing a change in health status.
Methods
We retrospectively analyzed the changes in a CROM (Fingertip-To-Floor Test – FTF) and PROMs (ODI, HAQ-DI, NPRS, EQ5D) and the associations between these outcomes in 395 patients with lower back pain (57.2 ± 11.8 years, 49.1% female). We introduced a new way to measure and classify outcome performance using a distribution-based approach (t2D). Outcome measures were assessed at baseline and after 21 days of inpatient rehabilitation.
Results
Overall, the rehabilitation (Cohens d = 0.94) resulted in a large effect size outcome. Medium effect sizes were observed for FTF (d = 0.70) and PROMs (d > 0.50). Best performance rating was observed for pain (NPRS). We found that 13.9% of patients exhibited a deterioration in the PROMs, but only 2.3%, in the FTF. The correlation between the PROMs and FTF were low to moderate, with the highest identified for HAQ-DI (rho = 0.30–0.36); no significant correlations could be shown for changes. High consistency levels were observed among the performance scores (t2D) in 68.9% of the patients.
Conclusions
Different and complementary assessment modalities of PROMs and CROMs can be used as valuable tools in the clinical setting. Results from both types of measurements and individual performance assessments in patients provide a valid basis for the meaningful interpretation of the patients’ health outcomes.
Trial registration. This clinical study was entered retrospectively on August 14, 2020 into the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS, registration number: DRKS00022854).
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference50 articles.
1. Hoy, D., Brooks, P., Blyth, F., & Buchbinder, R. (2010). The epidemiology of low back pain. Best Practice & Research Clinical Rheumatology, 24(6), 769–781. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.berh.2010.10.002 2. Hoy, D., March, L., Brooks, P., Blyth, F., Woolf, A., Bain, C., et al. (2014). The global burden of low back pain: Estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases, 73(6), 968–974. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204428 3. Chou, R., Deyo, R., Friedly, J., Skelly, A., Hashimoto, R., Weimer, M., et al. (2017). Nonpharmacologic therapies for low back pain: A systematic review for an American College of Physicians Clinical Practice Guideline. Annals of Internal Medicine, 166(7), 493–505. https://doi.org/10.7326/M16-2459 4. Ramasamy, A., Martin, M. L., Blum, S. I., Liedgens, H., Argoff, C., Freynhagen, R., et al. (2017). Assessment of patient-reported outcome instruments to assess chronic low back pain. Pain Medicine, 18(6), 1098–1110. https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnw357 5. McGirt, M. J., Bydon, M., Archer, K. R., Devin, C. J., Chotai, S., Parker, S. L., et al. (2017). An analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database, Part 1. Disability, quality of life, and pain outcomes following lumbar spine surgery: predicting likely individual patient outcomes for shared decision-making. J Neurosurg Spine, 27(4), 357–369. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.11.SPINE16526
Cited by
16 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|