Outcome measures for low back pain research

A proposal for standardized use

Richard (Rick) Deyo, Michele Battie, A. J H M Beurskens, Claire Bombardier, Peter Croft, Bart Koes, Antti Malmivaara, Martin Roland, Michael Von Korff, Gordon Waddell

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

871 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Study Design. An international group of back pain researchers considered recommendations for standardized measures in clinical outcomes research in patients with back pain. Objectives. To promote more standardization of outcome measurement in clinical trials and other types of outcomes research, including recta-analyses, cost-effectiveness analyses, and multicenter studies. Summary of Background Data. Better standardization of outcome measurement would facilitate comparison of results among studies, and more complete reporting of relevant outcomes. Because back pain is rarely fatal or completely cured, outcome assessment is complex and involves multiple dimensions. These include symptoms, function, general well-being, work disability, and satisfaction, with care. Methods. The panel considered several factors in recommending a standard battery of outcome measures. These included reliability, validity, responsiveness, and practicality of the measures. In addition, compatibility with widely used and promoted batteries such as the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Lumbar Cluster were considered to minimize the need for changes when these instruments are used. Results. First, a six-item set was proposed, which is sufficiently brief that it could be used in routine care settings for quality improvement and for research purposes. An expanded outcome set, which would provide more precise measurement for research purposes, includes measures of severity and frequency of symptoms, either the Roland or the Oswestry Disability Scale, either the SF-12 or the EuroQol measure of general health status, a question about satisfaction with symptoms, three types of 'disability days,' and an optional single item on overall satisfaction with medical care. Conclusion. Standardized measurement of outcomes would facilitate scientific advances in clinical care. A short, 6-item questionnaire and a somewhat expanded, more precise battery of questionnaires can be recommended. Although many considerations sup port such recommendations, more data on responsiveness and the minimally important change n scores are needed for most of the instruments.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2003-2013
Number of pages11
JournalSpine
Volume23
Issue number18
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 15 1998
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Low Back Pain
Research Design
Back Pain
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Job Satisfaction
Quality Improvement
Research
Rectum
Reproducibility of Results
Health Status
Multicenter Studies
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Research Personnel
Clinical Trials
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • Back pain
  • Clinical research
  • Disability
  • Health status
  • Outcomes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physiology
  • Clinical Neurology
  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

Deyo, R. R., Battie, M., Beurskens, A. J. H. M., Bombardier, C., Croft, P., Koes, B., ... Waddell, G. (1998). Outcome measures for low back pain research: A proposal for standardized use. Spine, 23(18), 2003-2013. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199809150-00018

Outcome measures for low back pain research : A proposal for standardized use. / Deyo, Richard (Rick); Battie, Michele; Beurskens, A. J H M; Bombardier, Claire; Croft, Peter; Koes, Bart; Malmivaara, Antti; Roland, Martin; Von Korff, Michael; Waddell, Gordon.

In: Spine, Vol. 23, No. 18, 15.09.1998, p. 2003-2013.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Deyo, RR, Battie, M, Beurskens, AJHM, Bombardier, C, Croft, P, Koes, B, Malmivaara, A, Roland, M, Von Korff, M & Waddell, G 1998, 'Outcome measures for low back pain research: A proposal for standardized use', Spine, vol. 23, no. 18, pp. 2003-2013. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199809150-00018
Deyo RR, Battie M, Beurskens AJHM, Bombardier C, Croft P, Koes B et al. Outcome measures for low back pain research: A proposal for standardized use. Spine. 1998 Sep 15;23(18):2003-2013. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199809150-00018
Deyo, Richard (Rick) ; Battie, Michele ; Beurskens, A. J H M ; Bombardier, Claire ; Croft, Peter ; Koes, Bart ; Malmivaara, Antti ; Roland, Martin ; Von Korff, Michael ; Waddell, Gordon. / Outcome measures for low back pain research : A proposal for standardized use. In: Spine. 1998 ; Vol. 23, No. 18. pp. 2003-2013.
@article{e329ff8e816540398cad8a81fafb6041,
title = "Outcome measures for low back pain research: A proposal for standardized use",
abstract = "Study Design. An international group of back pain researchers considered recommendations for standardized measures in clinical outcomes research in patients with back pain. Objectives. To promote more standardization of outcome measurement in clinical trials and other types of outcomes research, including recta-analyses, cost-effectiveness analyses, and multicenter studies. Summary of Background Data. Better standardization of outcome measurement would facilitate comparison of results among studies, and more complete reporting of relevant outcomes. Because back pain is rarely fatal or completely cured, outcome assessment is complex and involves multiple dimensions. These include symptoms, function, general well-being, work disability, and satisfaction, with care. Methods. The panel considered several factors in recommending a standard battery of outcome measures. These included reliability, validity, responsiveness, and practicality of the measures. In addition, compatibility with widely used and promoted batteries such as the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Lumbar Cluster were considered to minimize the need for changes when these instruments are used. Results. First, a six-item set was proposed, which is sufficiently brief that it could be used in routine care settings for quality improvement and for research purposes. An expanded outcome set, which would provide more precise measurement for research purposes, includes measures of severity and frequency of symptoms, either the Roland or the Oswestry Disability Scale, either the SF-12 or the EuroQol measure of general health status, a question about satisfaction with symptoms, three types of 'disability days,' and an optional single item on overall satisfaction with medical care. Conclusion. Standardized measurement of outcomes would facilitate scientific advances in clinical care. A short, 6-item questionnaire and a somewhat expanded, more precise battery of questionnaires can be recommended. Although many considerations sup port such recommendations, more data on responsiveness and the minimally important change n scores are needed for most of the instruments.",
keywords = "Back pain, Clinical research, Disability, Health status, Outcomes",
author = "Deyo, {Richard (Rick)} and Michele Battie and Beurskens, {A. J H M} and Claire Bombardier and Peter Croft and Bart Koes and Antti Malmivaara and Martin Roland and {Von Korff}, Michael and Gordon Waddell",
year = "1998",
month = "9",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1097/00007632-199809150-00018",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "2003--2013",
journal = "Spine",
issn = "0362-2436",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "18",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Outcome measures for low back pain research

T2 - A proposal for standardized use

AU - Deyo, Richard (Rick)

AU - Battie, Michele

AU - Beurskens, A. J H M

AU - Bombardier, Claire

AU - Croft, Peter

AU - Koes, Bart

AU - Malmivaara, Antti

AU - Roland, Martin

AU - Von Korff, Michael

AU - Waddell, Gordon

PY - 1998/9/15

Y1 - 1998/9/15

N2 - Study Design. An international group of back pain researchers considered recommendations for standardized measures in clinical outcomes research in patients with back pain. Objectives. To promote more standardization of outcome measurement in clinical trials and other types of outcomes research, including recta-analyses, cost-effectiveness analyses, and multicenter studies. Summary of Background Data. Better standardization of outcome measurement would facilitate comparison of results among studies, and more complete reporting of relevant outcomes. Because back pain is rarely fatal or completely cured, outcome assessment is complex and involves multiple dimensions. These include symptoms, function, general well-being, work disability, and satisfaction, with care. Methods. The panel considered several factors in recommending a standard battery of outcome measures. These included reliability, validity, responsiveness, and practicality of the measures. In addition, compatibility with widely used and promoted batteries such as the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Lumbar Cluster were considered to minimize the need for changes when these instruments are used. Results. First, a six-item set was proposed, which is sufficiently brief that it could be used in routine care settings for quality improvement and for research purposes. An expanded outcome set, which would provide more precise measurement for research purposes, includes measures of severity and frequency of symptoms, either the Roland or the Oswestry Disability Scale, either the SF-12 or the EuroQol measure of general health status, a question about satisfaction with symptoms, three types of 'disability days,' and an optional single item on overall satisfaction with medical care. Conclusion. Standardized measurement of outcomes would facilitate scientific advances in clinical care. A short, 6-item questionnaire and a somewhat expanded, more precise battery of questionnaires can be recommended. Although many considerations sup port such recommendations, more data on responsiveness and the minimally important change n scores are needed for most of the instruments.

AB - Study Design. An international group of back pain researchers considered recommendations for standardized measures in clinical outcomes research in patients with back pain. Objectives. To promote more standardization of outcome measurement in clinical trials and other types of outcomes research, including recta-analyses, cost-effectiveness analyses, and multicenter studies. Summary of Background Data. Better standardization of outcome measurement would facilitate comparison of results among studies, and more complete reporting of relevant outcomes. Because back pain is rarely fatal or completely cured, outcome assessment is complex and involves multiple dimensions. These include symptoms, function, general well-being, work disability, and satisfaction, with care. Methods. The panel considered several factors in recommending a standard battery of outcome measures. These included reliability, validity, responsiveness, and practicality of the measures. In addition, compatibility with widely used and promoted batteries such as the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Lumbar Cluster were considered to minimize the need for changes when these instruments are used. Results. First, a six-item set was proposed, which is sufficiently brief that it could be used in routine care settings for quality improvement and for research purposes. An expanded outcome set, which would provide more precise measurement for research purposes, includes measures of severity and frequency of symptoms, either the Roland or the Oswestry Disability Scale, either the SF-12 or the EuroQol measure of general health status, a question about satisfaction with symptoms, three types of 'disability days,' and an optional single item on overall satisfaction with medical care. Conclusion. Standardized measurement of outcomes would facilitate scientific advances in clinical care. A short, 6-item questionnaire and a somewhat expanded, more precise battery of questionnaires can be recommended. Although many considerations sup port such recommendations, more data on responsiveness and the minimally important change n scores are needed for most of the instruments.

KW - Back pain

KW - Clinical research

KW - Disability

KW - Health status

KW - Outcomes

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0032530938&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0032530938&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/00007632-199809150-00018

DO - 10.1097/00007632-199809150-00018

M3 - Article

VL - 23

SP - 2003

EP - 2013

JO - Spine

JF - Spine

SN - 0362-2436

IS - 18

ER -