Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 11/2006

01-11-2006 | Original Article

Discriminative validity and responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index among Japanese outpatients with lumbar conditions

Authors: Hideki Hashimoto, Masahi Komagata, Osamu Nakai, Masutaro Morishita, Yasuaki Tokuhashi, Shigeo Sano, Yutaka Nohara, Yukikazu Okajima

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 11/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is one of the most used assessment scales for patients with spine conditions, and translations into several languages have already been available. However, the scale’s discriminative validity and responsiveness to the clinical change was somewhat understudied in these translated versions of the ODI. In this study, we independently developed a Japanese version of the ODI, and tested its discriminative and responsive performances among outpatients with various spinal conditions. We recruited 167 outpatients from seven participating clinics, and concurrently measured the translated ODI and MOS Short Form 36 (SF36) as a reference scale. We also obtained from medical records clinical information such as diagnoses, the past history of surgery, and existence of subjective symptoms and clinical signs. For testing discriminative validity, scores were compared by the number of symptoms and signs, with the trend test. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis was also conducted to compare ODI and SF36 in their performance to discriminate the existence of signs/symptoms, by chi-square test on the area under ROC curve (AUC). For 35 patients (17 clinically stable, 18 undergoing surgery and clinically significantly changed), the two scales were repeatedly administered after 3–6 months to compare responsiveness by using ROC analysis. The translated ODI and the SF36 Physical Function (PF) subscale showed a significant trend increase as the numbers of symptoms/signs increased. They also showed comparable performance in discriminating the existence of signs/symptoms (AUC=0.70–0.76 for ODI, 0.69–0.70 for SF36 PF, P=0.15–0.81), and clinical status change over time (AUC=0.82 for ODI, 0.72 for SF36 PF, P=0.31). Our results showed that the translated Japanese ODI showed fair discriminative validity and responsiveness as the original English scale showed.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Koke AJ (1996) Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments. Pain 65:71–76CrossRefPubMed Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Koke AJ (1996) Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments. Pain 65:71–76CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Boscainos PJ, Sapkas G, Stilianessi E, Prouskas K, Papadakis SA (2003) Greek versions of the Oswestry and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaires. Clin Orthop 411:40–53PubMed Boscainos PJ, Sapkas G, Stilianessi E, Prouskas K, Papadakis SA (2003) Greek versions of the Oswestry and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaires. Clin Orthop 411:40–53PubMed
3.
4.
go back to reference Davidson M, Keating JL (2002) A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness. Phys Ther 82:8–24PubMed Davidson M, Keating JL (2002) A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness. Phys Ther 82:8–24PubMed
5.
go back to reference Deyo R, Centor R (1986) Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change; an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chron Dis 39:897–906CrossRefPubMed Deyo R, Centor R (1986) Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change; an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chron Dis 39:897–906CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Deyo R, Diehr P, Patrick D (1991) Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures; statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin Trials 12:142S–158SPubMedCrossRef Deyo R, Diehr P, Patrick D (1991) Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures; statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin Trials 12:142S–158SPubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Fujiwara A, Kobayashi N, Saiki K et al (2003) Association of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score with the Oswestry Disability Index, Roland-Morris disability questionnaire, and Short-Form 36. Spine 28:1601–1607CrossRefPubMed Fujiwara A, Kobayashi N, Saiki K et al (2003) Association of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score with the Oswestry Disability Index, Roland-Morris disability questionnaire, and Short-Form 36. Spine 28:1601–1607CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Fukuhara S, Bito S, Green J et al (1998) Translation, adaptation, and validation of the SF-36 Health Survey for use in Japan. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1037–1044CrossRefPubMed Fukuhara S, Bito S, Green J et al (1998) Translation, adaptation, and validation of the SF-36 Health Survey for use in Japan. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1037–1044CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Fukuhara S, Ware J Jr, Kosinski M et al (1998) Psychometric and clinical tests of validity of the Japanese SF-36 Health Survey. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1045–1053CrossRefPubMed Fukuhara S, Ware J Jr, Kosinski M et al (1998) Psychometric and clinical tests of validity of the Japanese SF-36 Health Survey. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1045–1053CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Grevitt M, Khazim R, Webb J et al (1997) The Short Form-36 Health Survey questionnaire in spine surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79:48–52CrossRefPubMed Grevitt M, Khazim R, Webb J et al (1997) The Short Form-36 Health Survey questionnaire in spine surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79:48–52CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Guillemin F (1995) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of health status measures. Scand J Rheumatol 24:61–63PubMed Guillemin F (1995) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of health status measures. Scand J Rheumatol 24:61–63PubMed
14.
go back to reference Guyatt GH, Deyo RA, Charlson M et al (1989) Responsiveness and validity in health status measurement: a clarification. J Clin Epidemiol 42:403–408CrossRefPubMed Guyatt GH, Deyo RA, Charlson M et al (1989) Responsiveness and validity in health status measurement: a clarification. J Clin Epidemiol 42:403–408CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Hanscom B, Lurie JD, Homa K et al (2002) Computerized questionnaires and the quality of survey data. Spine 27:1797–1801CrossRefPubMed Hanscom B, Lurie JD, Homa K et al (2002) Computerized questionnaires and the quality of survey data. Spine 27:1797–1801CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Kim DY, Lee SH, Lee HY et al (2005) Validation of the Korean version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 30:E123–E127CrossRefPubMed Kim DY, Lee SH, Lee HY et al (2005) Validation of the Korean version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 30:E123–E127CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Leclaire R, Blier F, Fortin L et al (1997) A cross-sectional study comparing the Oswestry and Roland-Morris Functional Disability scales in two populations of patients with low back pain of different levels of severity. Spine 22:68–71CrossRefPubMed Leclaire R, Blier F, Fortin L et al (1997) A cross-sectional study comparing the Oswestry and Roland-Morris Functional Disability scales in two populations of patients with low back pain of different levels of severity. Spine 22:68–71CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Mannion AF, Junge A, Fairbank JC et al (2005) Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 1: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity. Eur Spine J [Epub ahead of print] Mannion AF, Junge A, Fairbank JC et al (2005) Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 1: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity. Eur Spine J [Epub ahead of print]
19.
go back to reference Mannion AF, Junge A, Grob D et al (2005) Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 2: sensitivity to change after spinal surgery. Eur Spine J [Epub ahead of print] Mannion AF, Junge A, Grob D et al (2005) Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 2: sensitivity to change after spinal surgery. Eur Spine J [Epub ahead of print]
20.
go back to reference McConnell JR, Freeman BJ, Debnath UK et al (2003) A prospective randomized comparison of coralline hydroxyapatite with autograft in cervical interbody fusion. Spine 28:317–323CrossRefPubMed McConnell JR, Freeman BJ, Debnath UK et al (2003) A prospective randomized comparison of coralline hydroxyapatite with autograft in cervical interbody fusion. Spine 28:317–323CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Ng LC, Sell P (2004) Outcomes of a prospective cohort study on peri-radicular infiltration for radicular pain in patients with lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 13:325–329CrossRefPubMed Ng LC, Sell P (2004) Outcomes of a prospective cohort study on peri-radicular infiltration for radicular pain in patients with lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 13:325–329CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Ng L, Chaudhary N, Sell P (2005) The efficacy of corticosteroids in periradicular infiltration for chronic radicular pain: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Spine 30:857–862CrossRefPubMed Ng L, Chaudhary N, Sell P (2005) The efficacy of corticosteroids in periradicular infiltration for chronic radicular pain: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial. Spine 30:857–862CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Roland M, Fairbank J (2000) The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Spine 25:3115–3124CrossRefPubMed Roland M, Fairbank J (2000) The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Spine 25:3115–3124CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Spratt KF, Keller TS, Szpalski M et al (2004) A predictive model for outcome after conservative decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 13:14–21CrossRefPubMed Spratt KF, Keller TS, Szpalski M et al (2004) A predictive model for outcome after conservative decompression surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 13:14–21CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Spruit M, van Jonbergen JP, de Kleuver M (2005) A concise follow-up of a previous report: posterior reduction and anterior lumbar interbody fusion in symptomatic low-grade adult isthmic spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J [Epub ahead of print] Spruit M, van Jonbergen JP, de Kleuver M (2005) A concise follow-up of a previous report: posterior reduction and anterior lumbar interbody fusion in symptomatic low-grade adult isthmic spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J [Epub ahead of print]
26.
go back to reference Walsh TL, Hanscom B, Lurie JD et al (2003) Is a condition-specific instrument for patients with low back pain/leg symptoms really necessary? The responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index, MODEMS, and the SF-36. Spine 28:607–615CrossRefPubMed Walsh TL, Hanscom B, Lurie JD et al (2003) Is a condition-specific instrument for patients with low back pain/leg symptoms really necessary? The responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index, MODEMS, and the SF-36. Spine 28:607–615CrossRefPubMed
27.
go back to reference Wilson-MacDonald J, Burt G, Griffin D et al (2005) Epidural steroid injection for nerve root compression. A randomised, controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:352–355 Wilson-MacDonald J, Burt G, Griffin D et al (2005) Epidural steroid injection for nerve root compression. A randomised, controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:352–355
28.
go back to reference Yakut E, Duger T, Oksuz C et al (2004) Validation of the Turkish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Spine 29:581–585CrossRefPubMed Yakut E, Duger T, Oksuz C et al (2004) Validation of the Turkish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Spine 29:581–585CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Discriminative validity and responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index among Japanese outpatients with lumbar conditions
Authors
Hideki Hashimoto
Masahi Komagata
Osamu Nakai
Masutaro Morishita
Yasuaki Tokuhashi
Shigeo Sano
Yutaka Nohara
Yukikazu Okajima
Publication date
01-11-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 11/2006
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-005-0022-7

Other articles of this Issue 11/2006

European Spine Journal 11/2006 Go to the issue