Toward a Specific Outcome Instrument for Spinal Trauma. Issue 10 (15th May 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Sadiqi, Said; Lehr, A. Mechteld; Post, Marcel W.; Vaccaro, Alexander R.; Dvorak, Marcel F.; Oner, F. Cumhur
• Is Part Of: Spine. Volume 40:Issue 10(2015)
• Publication Date: 2015-05-15
• Subjects: Spine -- Abnormalities -- Periodicals; Spine -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Spine -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 616.73005
• DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000852
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0362-2436

Abstract

<abstract> <title> <x xml:space="preserve">Abstract</x> </title> <sec> <title>Study Design.</title> <p>Validation study.</p> </sec> <sec> <title>Objective.</title> <p>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 preinjury state.</p> </sec> <sec> <title>Summary of Background Data.</title> <p>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 preinjury state is crucial.</p> </sec> <sec> <title>Methods.</title> <p>In the first phase, 3 different question formats and 3 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 5 different response formats: 0–10 Numeric Rating Scale-11, 0–100 Numeric Rating Scale-101, Visual Analogue Scale, Verbal Rating Scale, and Adjective Scale. All patients were interviewed in a semistructured fashion to identify their preferences. Multiple statistical analyses were performed: test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and discriminant validity.</p> </sec> <sec> <title>Results.</title> <p>Twenty eligible patients were enrolled in the first phase and 59 in the second phase. The initial phase revealed the highest preference for 1 specific question format (60.0% and 86.7% after the first and second administration of the questionnaire, respectively). The second phase showed the Verbal Rating Scale as the most preferred response format (35.6%). The semistructured interviews revealed that overall, a subgroup of patients preferred a verbal response format (42.4%), and another group of patients preferred a numerical response format (49.1%). The statistical analysis showed good to excellent psychometric properties for all formats.</p> </sec> <sec> <title>Conclusion.</title> <p>The most preferred question and response formats were identified for use in a disease-specific outcome instrument for spinal trauma patients.</p> <p> <bold>Level of Evidence:</bold> 3</p> </sec> </abstract>