|
Citation
|
Sadiqi S, Lehr AM, Post MW, Vaccaro AR, Dvorak MF, Oner FC. Spine 2015; 40(10): E578-86. |
|
Affiliation
|
1Department of Orthopaedics, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands 2Rehabilitation Center 'De Hoogstraat', Utrecht, The Netherlands 3Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Center for Rehabilitation, University Medical Center Groningen, The Netherlands 4Department of Orthopaedics, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA 5Department of Orthopaedics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. |
|
Abstract
|
Study Design. Validation study.
OBJECTIVE. To investigate the most valid, reliable, and comprehensible response scale for spinal trauma patients to compare their current level of function and health with their pre-injury state.Summary of Background Data. In the context of a main project of the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Trauma to develop a disease specific outcome instrument for adult spinal trauma patients, the need to identify a response scale that uniquely reflects the degree to which a spine trauma patient has returned to his or her pre-injury state is crucial.
METHODS. In the first phase, three different question formats and three different response formats were investigated in a questionnaire, which was administered twice. Based on the results of the first phase, in the second phase a modified questionnaire was administered once to a second group of patients to investigate five different response formats: 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11), 0-100 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-101), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Verbal Rating Scale (VRS), and Adjective Scale (AS). All patients were interviewed in a semi-structured fashion to identify their preferences. Multiple statistical analyses were performed: test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and discriminant validity.
RESULTS. Twenty eligible patients were enrolled in the first phase and 59 in the second phase. The initial phase revealed the highest preference for one specific question format (60.0% and 86.7% after the first and second administration of the questionnaire, respectively). The second phase showed the VRS as the most preferred response format (35.6%). The semi-structured interviews revealed that overall, a subgroup of patients preferred a verbal response format (42.4%), and another group a numerical response format (49.1%). The statistical analysis showed good to excellent psychometric properties for all formats.
CONCLUSIONS. The most preferred question and response formats were identified for use in a disease specific outcome instrument for spinal trauma patients.
Language: en |