Responsiveness of a Patient Specific Outcome Measure Compared With the Oswestry Disability Index v2.1 and Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire for Patients With Subacute and Chronic Low Back Pain

Spine ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 33 (22) ◽  
pp. 2450-2457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Frost ◽  
Sarah E. Lamb ◽  
Sarah Stewart-Brown
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Oswestry Disability Index ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Specific Outcome ◽  
Disability Questionnaire

scholarly journals Motor Control Exercise for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 89 (12) ◽  
pp. 1275-1286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leonardo O.P. Costa ◽  
Christopher G. Maher ◽  
Jane Latimer ◽  
Paul W. Hodges ◽  
Robert D. Herbert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Motor Control ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Exercise Intervention ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Functional Scale ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Control Exercise

BackgroundThe evidence that exercise intervention is effective for treatment of chronic low back pain comes from trials that are not placebo-controlled.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of motor control exercise for people with chronic low back pain.DesignThis was a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.SettingThe study was conducted in an outpatient physical therapy department in Australia.PatientsThe participants were 154 patients with chronic low back pain of more than 12 weeks’ duration.InterventionTwelve sessions of motor control exercise (ie, exercises designed to improve function of specific muscles of the low back region and the control of posture and movement) or placebo (ie, detuned ultrasound therapy and detuned short-wave therapy) were conducted over 8 weeks.MeasurementsPrimary outcomes were pain intensity, activity (measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale), and patient's global impression of recovery measured at 2 months. Secondary outcomes were pain; activity (measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale); patient's global impression of recovery measured at 6 and 12 months; activity limitation (measured by the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire) at 2, 6, and 12 months; and risk of persistent or recurrent pain at 12 months.ResultsThe exercise intervention improved activity and patient's global impression of recovery but did not clearly reduce pain at 2 months. The mean effect of exercise on activity (measured by the Patient-Specific Functional Scale) was 1.1 points (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.3 to 1.8), the mean effect on global impression of recovery was 1.5 points (95% CI=0.4 to 2.5), and the mean effect on pain was 0.9 points (95% CI=−0.01 to 1.8), all measured on 11-point scales. Secondary outcomes also favored motor control exercise.LimitationClinicians could not be blinded to the intervention they provided.ConclusionsMotor control exercise produced short-term improvements in global impression of recovery and activity, but not pain, for people with chronic low back pain. Most of the effects observed in the short term were maintained at the 6- and 12-month follow-ups.

scholarly journals The effect of an integrated multidisciplinary rehabilitation programme alternating inpatient interventions with home-based activities for patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 382-393 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Mette Schmidt ◽  
Berit Schiøttz-Christensen ◽  
Nadine E Foster ◽  
Trine Bay Laurberg ◽  
Thomas Maribo
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Oswestry Disability Index ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Rehabilitation Programme ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Oswestry Disability Index Score ◽  
Home Based

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of an integrated rehabilitation programme with an existing rehabilitation programme in patients with chronic low back pain. Design: A single-centre, pragmatic, two-arm parallel, randomized controlled trial (1:1 ratio). Setting: A rheumatology inpatient rehabilitation centre in Denmark. Subjects: A total of 165 adults (aged ⩾ 18 years) with chronic low back pain. Interventions: An integrated rehabilitation programme comprising an alternation of three weeks of inpatient stay and 12 weeks of home-based activities was compared with an existing rehabilitation programme of four weeks of inpatient stay. Main measures: Patient-reported outcomes were collected at baseline and at the 26-week follow-up. The primary outcome was back-specific disability (Oswestry Disability Index). Secondary outcomes included pain intensity (Numerical Rating Scale), pain self-efficacy (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire), health-related quality of life (EuroQol-5 Domain 5-level (EQ-5D)), and depression (Major Depression Inventory). A complete case analysis was performed. Results: A total of 303 patients were assessed for eligibility of whom 165 (mean age: 50 years (SD 13) and mean Oswestry Disability Index score 42 (SD 11)) were randomized (83 to existing rehabilitation programme and 82 to integrated rehabilitation programme). Overall, 139 patients provided the 26-week follow-up data. Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable between programmes. The between-group difference in the Oswestry Disability Index score when adjusting for the corresponding baseline score was −0.28 (95% confidence interval (CI): −4.02, 3.45) which was neither statistically nor clinically significant. No significant differences were found in the secondary outcomes. Conclusion: An integrated rehabilitation programme was no more effective than an existing rehabilitation programme at the 26-week follow-up.

scholarly journals Are stabilisation exercises different to other treatments in improving physical activity or reducing disability for people with persistent low back pain? A systematic literature review

2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (11) ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Sara Gardiner ◽  
Helena Daniell ◽  
Benjamin Smith ◽  
Rachel Chester
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Fear Avoidance ◽  
Functional Scale ◽  
Disability Questionnaire ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Background/Aims Stabilisation exercises are commonly prescribed for people with persistent low back pain. However, for some patients, it has been hypothesised that stabilisation exercises could draw attention to protecting the core, promote hypervigilance and inhibit volitional movement. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and reported adverse events, in particular fear avoidance, of stabilisation exercises compared with placebo or other treatments offered by physiotherapists on the outcome of disability and activity at 12- and 24-months' follow-up. Methods The following electronic databases were searched: Embase, Medline, AMED, CINAHL, from inception to June 2019. Only randomised controlled trails were included. Study selection, data extraction and appraisal of quality criteria using PEDro, were undertaken by two independent assessors. Results Seven studies (n=1820) were eligible. Of six studies that reported adverse effects in the group receiving stabilisation exercises, four reported none and two reported mild exacerbation of pain locally or elsewhere. Fear avoidance was not investigated in any of the studies. Across the studies, 12 analyses were reported and included seven different comparator groups and three outcome measures: Oswestry Disability Index (n=1), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (n=5), Patient Specific Functional Scale (n=4). Two studies included a 24-month follow up in addition to a 12-month follow up. Of the 12 studies, nine reported no significant differences between the effectiveness of stabilisation exercises and comparator groups. Stabilisation exercises were more effective than comparator groups for the following three analyses: compared to manual therapy or education at 12 but not 24 months for the Oswestry Disability Index (15.71, 95% confidence interval 19.3–10.01); compared to placebo for the Patient Specific Functional Scale (1.5, 95% confidence interval 0.7–2.2) but not the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire; and compared to high load lifting for the Patient Specific Functional Scale (1.8 95% confidence interval 2.8–0.7). Conclusions Stabilisation exercises are safe and equally effective to other treatments, and possibly superior for some outcomes at some time points. No or only mild adverse effects were reported. However, none of the studies measured fear avoidance as an outcome and we recommend this be included in future randomised controlled trials measuring the effectiveness of stabilisation exercises.

Effectiveness of Simulated Horseback Riding for Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
TaeYeong Kim ◽  
JaeHyuk Lee ◽  
SeJun Oh ◽  
Seungmin Kim ◽  
BumChul Yoon
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Oswestry Disability Index ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Numeric Rating Scale ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Baseline Values ◽  
Numeric Rating

Context: A simulated horseback riding (SHR) exercise is effective for improvement of pain and functional disability, but its comparative effectiveness with the other is unknown. Objective: The authors aimed to demonstrate the effect of a SHR exercise in people with chronic low back pain. Design: A randomized controlled trial. Settings: Community and university campus. Participants: A total of 48 participants with chronic low back pain were divided into 2 groups, and SHR exercises (n = 24) or stabilization (STB) exercises (n = 24) were performed. Interventions: The exercises were performed for 30 minutes, 2 days per week for 8 weeks. Main Outcome Measures: Numeric rating scale, functional disabilities (Oswestry disability index and Roland–Morris disability), and fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire (FABQ) scores were measured at baseline and at 4 weeks, 8 weeks, and 6 months. Results: A 2-way repeated analysis of variance identified that between-group comparisons showed significant differences in the FABQ related to work scale (F = 21.422; P = .01). There were no significant differences in the numeric rating scale (F = 1.696; P = .21), Oswestry disability index (F = 1.848; P = .20), Roland–Morris disability (F = 0.069; P = .80), and FABQ related to physical scale (F = 1.579; P = .24). In within-group comparisons, both groups presented significant differences in numeric rating scale (both SHR and STB after 4 wk), Oswestry disability index (both SHR and STB after 6 mo), and Roland–Morris disability (SHR after 6 mo and STB after 8 wk) compared with baseline values. In FABQ-related physical (SHR after 4 wk) and work scales (SHR after 6 mo), there were only significant differences in the SHR compared with baseline values. Conclusions: SHR exercise for 8 weeks had a greater effect than STB exercise for reducing work-related FABQ. The SHR exercise performed in a seated position could substantially decrease pain-related fear disability in young adults with chronic low back pain.

scholarly journals Oswestry Disability Index Scoring Made Easy

2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (6) ◽  
pp. 497-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Mehra ◽  
D Baker ◽  
S Disney ◽  
PB Pynsent
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Staff Training ◽  
Oswestry Disability Index ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Prospective Audit ◽  
Staff Members ◽  
Active Life ◽  
Scoring Accuracy

INTRODUCTION Low back pain effects up to 80% of the population at some time during their active life. Questionnaires are available to help measure pain and disability. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is the most commonly used outcome measure for low back pain. The aim of this study was to see if training in completing the ODI forms improved the scoring accuracy. PATIENTS AND METHODS The last 100 ODI forms completed in a hospital's spinal clinic were reviewed retrospectively and errors in the scoring were identified. Staff members involved in scoring the questionnaire were made aware of the errors and the correct method of scoring explained. A chart was created with all possible scores to aid the staff with scoring. A prospective audit on 50 questionnaires was subsequently performed. RESULTS The retrospective study showed that 33 of the 100 forms had been incorrectly scored. All questionnaires where one or more sections were not completed by the patient were incorrectly scored. A scoring chart was developed and staff training was implemented. This reduced the error rate to 14% in the prospective audit. CONCLUSIONS Clinicians applying outcome measures should read the appropriate literature to ensure they understand the scoring system. Staff must then be given adequate training in the application of the questionnaires.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document