Do the commonly used standard questionnaires measure what is of concern to patients with low back pain?

Author:

Calmon Almeida Verena1ORCID,da Silva Junior Walderi Monteiro2,de Camargo Olaf Kraus3,de Santana Filho Valter Joviniano2,Oliveira Géssica Uruga1,Santana Mylena Salgueiro1,de Farias Neto Jader Pereira2

Affiliation:

1. Postgraduate Programs, Federal University of Sergipe, São Cristóvão, SE, Brazil

2. Physical Therapy Department, Center for Life Sciences and Health, Federal University of Sergipe, São Cristóvão, SE, Brazil

3. Department of Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

Abstract

Objective: Evaluate whether questionnaires identified all the self-reported patient outcomes raised in focus groups. Design: Mixed methods research combined with qualitative analysis of focus groups. Settings: Physical therapy clinic in a teaching hospital in Brazil. Subjects: A total of 27 patients (aged >18 years, mean age 55.2 years) with chronic non-specific low back pain. Interventions: Three focus groups were conducted by the same investigator and analyzed by meaning unit condensation. The results obtained from the focus groups were codified according to the International Classification of Functioning. A similar process was adopted to codify the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale and the Oswestry Disability Index according to the International Classification of Functioning. The results of both coding processes were compared. Results: In the analysis, seven main concepts were identified, comprising 77 meaning units. Only three meaning units were not linked to the International Classification of Functioning. Most of the codes present in the questionnaires and focus groups represent limitations to activities. Some codes were identified in the questionnaires that were not mentioned by the focus group participants. No questionnaire assessed environmental factors or problems related to specific parts of the body, and very few assessed body function, all of which were issues raised in the focus groups. Conclusion: This study shows that not all fields considered important by patients to their function are being evaluated, and emotional and contextual factors should be included in clinical assessments in order to fully understand patient need.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Rehabilitation,Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3