Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) questionnaires for people with pain in any spine region. A systematic review

Edmund Leahy; Megan Davidson; Deenika Benjamin; Henry Wajswelner

doi:10.1016/j.math.2015.10.010

Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) questionnaires for people with pain in any spine region. A systematic review

Man Ther. 2016 Apr:22:22-30. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2015.10.010. Epub 2015 Oct 30.

Authors

Edmund Leahy¹, Megan Davidson², Deenika Benjamin³, Henry Wajswelner⁴

Affiliations

¹ Department of Rehabilitation, Nutrition and Sport, School of Allied Health, Level 5, HS3, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic 3086, Australia; Physiotherapy Department, Northern Health, 185 Cooper St, Epping, Vic 3076, Australia. Electronic address: e.leahy@latrobe.edu.au.
² Department of Rehabilitation, Nutrition and Sport, School of Allied Health, Level 5, HS3, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic 3086, Australia. Electronic address: m.davidson@latrobe.edu.au.
³ Department of Rehabilitation, Nutrition and Sport, School of Allied Health, Level 5, HS3, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic 3086, Australia. Electronic address: deenikabenjamin@optusnet.com.au.
⁴ Department of Rehabilitation, Nutrition and Sport, School of Allied Health, Level 5, HS3, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Vic 3086, Australia. Electronic address: h.wajswelner@latrobe.edu.au.

PMID: 26578163
DOI: 10.1016/j.math.2015.10.010

Abstract

Background/objective: This systematic review investigates the measurement properties of Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) questionnaires which evaluate disability associated with pain in any area of the spine.

Method: PRO questionnaires for people with pain in any spinal region were identified from existing systematic reviews and recent studies. Databases were searched for studies which evaluated the measurement properties of the included questionnaires to August 2015. Data synthesis used a levels of evidence approach which considered study methodological quality.

Results: The Extended Aberdeen Back Pain Scale (EA), Functional Rating Index (FRI) and Spine Functional Index (SFI) were identified as eligible for this review. The FRI was evaluated in 15 studies, with positive results for internal consistency, structural validity, hypothesis testing and responsiveness, negative results for measurement error and conflicting results for reliability. The SFI was evaluated in 3 studies with positive results for internal consistency, reliability, content validity, and structural validity. Conflicting results were found for hypothesis testing. The EA was evaluated in 3 studies which found negative results for internal consistency and structural validity.

Conclusions: The FRI is provisionally recommended for the assessment of disability in people with multi-area spinal pain. This conclusion is based on studies of mainly fair methodological quality.

Keywords: Measurement properties; Outcome; Patient-reported; Spine.

Publication types

Review
Systematic Review

MeSH terms

Cross-Cultural Comparison
Disability Evaluation*
Humans
Low Back Pain / physiopathology*
Pain Measurement*
Patient Reported Outcome Measures*
Psychometrics
Reproducibility of Results
Spine / physiopathology*
Surveys and Questionnaires*