Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-09-2016

Development of a Modified Version of the Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS): A Mixed Method Approach

Authors: Svenja Janssen, Maurizio A. Trippolini, Roger Hilfiker, Peter Oesch

Published in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation | Issue 3/2016

Abstract

Purpose To develop a modified version of the spinal function sort (M-SFS) by measuring work-related self-efficacy beliefs in patients with chronic low back pain. Methods A mixed method design consisting of three different methods (M1–3) was performed. In semi-structured interviews participants were asked how often they performed the activities of the 50 SFS items in 1 week, and which spinal postures and movements were associated with their back pain (M1). Quantitative analysis of previously obtained SFS data investigated internal consistency, unidimensionality, item response, and floor and ceiling effect (M2). Experts rated the SFS items based on their relevance (M3). The findings from these methods were used within a final scoring system for item reduction. Results From semi-structured interviews with 17 participants, eight new items emerged (M1). Quantitative analysis of 565 data sets (M2) revealed very high internal consistency of all items (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.98) indicating item redundancy; unidimensionality of the SFS was supported by principal component analysis; good item response was confirmed by Rasch analysis; and a floor effect of four items depicting very heavy material handling was found. Experts agreed on 8 out of the 50 SFS as relevant (M3). From the original SFS, 12 items met the predefined summary score of 9. Conclusions A modified version of the SFS with 20 items has been developed. Feasibility, reliability and validity of this modified version must be tested before it can be used in clinical practice.

Available only for authorised users

McLean SM, May S, Klaber-Moffett J, Sharp DM, Gardiner E. Risk factors for the onset of non-specific neck pain: a systematic review. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010;64(7):565–72. doi:10.1136/jech.2009.090720.CrossRefPubMed

Jeffries LJ, Milanese SF, Grimmer-Somers KA. Epidemiology of adolescent spinal pain: a systematic overview of the research literature. Spine. 2007;32(23):2630–7. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e318158d70b.CrossRefPubMed

Hoy D, Bain C, Williams G, March L, Brooks P, Blyth F, et al. A systematic review of the global prevalence of low back pain. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64(6):2028–37. doi:10.1002/art.34347.CrossRefPubMed

Balagué F, Mannion AF, Pellisé F, Cedraschi C. Non-specific low back pain. Lancet. 2012;379(9814):482–91.CrossRefPubMed

van Tulder M, Becker A, Bekkering T, Breen A, Gil del Real MT, Hutchinson A, et al. Chapter 3. European guidelines for the management of acute nonspecific low back pain in primary care. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(Suppl 2):S169–91. doi:10.1007/s00586-006-1071-2.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Rahman A, Reed E, Underwood M, Shipley M, Omar R. Factors affecting self-efficacy and pain intensity in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain seen in a specialist rheumatology pain clinic. Rheumatology. 2008;47(12):1803–8.CrossRefPubMed

Self-efficacy Bandura A. In: Ramachaudran V, editor. Encyclopedia of human behavior. New York: Academic Press; 1994. p. 71–88.

Holden G. The relationship of self-efficacy appraisals to subsequent health related outcomes: a meta-analysis. Soc Work Health Care. 1991;16(1):53.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Engel GL. The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine. Science. 1977;196(4286):129–36.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Bandura A. Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol Rev. 1977;84(2):191–215.CrossRefPubMed

12.

van Abbema R, Lakke SE, Reneman MF, van der Schans CP, van Haastert CJ, Geertzen JH, et al. Factors associated with functional capacity test results in patients with non-specific chronic low back pain: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(4):455–73.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Burrus C, Ballabeni P, Deriaz O, Gobelet C, Luthi F. Predictors of nonresponse in a questionnaire-based outcome study of vocational rehabilitation patients. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(9):1499.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Mooney V, Matheson LN, Verna J, Leggett S, Dreisinger TE, Mayer JM. Performance-integrated self-report measurement of physical ability. Spine J. 2010;10(5):433–40.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Matheson LN, Matheson ML, Grant J. Development of a measure of perceived functional ability. J Occup Rehabil. 1993;3:15–30.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Gibson L, Strong J. The reliability and validity of a measure of perceived functional capacity for work in chronic back pain. J Occup Rehabil. 1996;6(3):159–75.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Oesch PR, Hilfiker R, Kool JP, Bachmann S, Hagen KB. Perceived functional ability assessed with the spinal function sort: is it valid for European rehabilitation settings in patients with non-specific non-acute low back pain? Eur Spine J. 2010;19(9):1527–33. doi:10.1007/s00586-010-1429-3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Borloz S, Trippolini MA, Ballabeni P, Luthi F, Deriaz O. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, internal consistency and validation of the spinal function sort (SFS) for French- and German-speaking patients with back complaints. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(3):387–93. doi:10.1007/s10926-012-9356-2.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Mayer J, Mooney V, Matheson L, Leggett S, Verna J, Balourdas G, et al. Reliability and validity of a new computer-administered pictorial activity and task sort. J Occup Rehabil. 2005;15(2):203–13.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Oliveri M, Jansen T, Oesch P, Kool J. The prognostic value of functional capacity evaluation in patients with chronic low back pain: part 1: timely return to work. And part 2: sustained recovery. Spine. 2005;30(10):1232–3; author reply 3–4.

21.

Kool JP, Oesch PR, Bachmann S, Knuesel O, Dierkes JG, Russo M, et al. Increasing days at work using function-centered rehabilitation in nonacute nonspecific low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;86(5):857–64. doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2004.10.044.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Matheson L, Matheson M, Grant J. Development of a measure of perceived functional ability. J Occup Rehabil. 1993;3(1):15–30. doi:10.1007/bf01076739.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Matheson LN., Matheson ML. Spinal function sort. Rating of perceived capacity. Test booklet and examiners manual. Performance Assessment and Capacity Testing PACT1989/1991.

24.

Fayad F, Lefevre-Colau MM, Poiraudeau S, Fermanian J, Rannou F, Wlodyka Demaille S, et al. Chronicité, récidive et reprise du travail dans la lombalgie: facteurs communs de pronostic [Chronicity, recurrence, and return to work in low back pain: common prognostic factors]. Annales de Readaptation et de Medecine Physique. 2004;47(4):179–89. doi:10.1016/j.annrmp.2004.01.005.CrossRefPubMed

25.

De Beeck RO, Hermans V. Research on work-related low back disorders. Brussels: Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 2000.

26.

Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. 2nd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE; 2011.

27.

Plano Clark VL, Creswell JW. The mixed method reader. Los Angeles: SAGE; 2008.

28.

Iakova M, Ballabeni P, Erhart P, Seichert N, Luthi F, Deriaz O. Self perceptions as predictors for return to work 2 years after rehabilitation in orthopedic trauma inpatients. J Occup Rehabil. 2012;22(4):532–40.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Flick U, Von Kadrorff E, Steinke I, editors. Qualitative Forschung. Ein Handbuch. 8th ed. Hamburg: Rowolt Taschenbuch Verlag; 2010.

30.

Pool J. Neck pain: “a pain in the neck?”: a study of therapeutic modalities and clinimetrics. Enschede: Gildeprint Drukkerijen B.V; 2007.

31.

Graneheim UH, Lundman B. Qualitative content analysis in nursing research: concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Educ Today. 2004;24(2):105–12. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001.CrossRefPubMed

32.

de Vries HJ, Brouwer S, Groothoff JW, Geertzen JH, Reneman MF. Staying at work with chronic nonspecific musculoskeletal pain: a qualitative study of workers’ experiences. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011;12:126. doi:10.1186/1471-2474-12-126.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

33.

Portney LG, Watkins MP. Reliability foundations of clinical research. Applications to practice. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall Health; 2000. p. 67.

34.

R Development Core Team. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2011.

35.

Winsteps 3.8, Chicago, IL, USA

36.

Linacre JM. What do infit and outfit, mean-square and standardized mean. Rasch Meas Trans. 2002;16(2):878.

37.

Streiner DL. Figuring out factors: the use and misuse of factor analysis. Can J Psychiatry. 1994;39(3):135–40.PubMed

38.

Stanton JM, Sinar EF, Balzer WK, Smith PC. Issues and strategies for reducing the length of self-report scales. Pers Psychol. 2002;55(1):167–94.CrossRef

39.

Campbell P, Wynne-Jones G, Muller S, Dunn KM. The influence of employment social support for risk and prognosis in nonspecific back pain: a systematic review and critical synthesis. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2013;86(2):119–37. doi:10.1007/s00420-012-0804-2.CrossRefPubMed

40.

Trippolini MA, Dijkstra PU, Geertzen JH, Reneman MF. Measurement properties of the spinal function sort in patients with sub-acute whiplash-associated disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2015;25(3):527–536.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Development of a Modified Version of the Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS): A Mixed Method Approach
Authors: Svenja Janssen
Maurizio A. Trippolini
Roger Hilfiker
Peter Oesch
Publication date: 01-09-2016
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation / Issue 3/2016
Print ISSN: 1053-0487
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3688
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-015-9611-4

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Development of a Modified Version of the Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS): A Mixed Method Approach

Abstract

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2016

Bridging Health Care and the Workplace: Formulation of a Return-to-Work Intervention for Breast Cancer Patients Using an Intervention Mapping Approach

Job Restrictions for Healthcare Workers with Musculoskeletal Disorders: Consequences from the Superior’s Viewpoint

A Model of Supervisor Decision-Making in the Accommodation of Workers with Low Back Pain

Correspondence in Stakeholder Assessment of Health, Work Capacity and Sick Leave in Workers with Comorbid Subjective Health Complaints? A Video Vignette Study

Rasch Analysis of the General Self-Efficacy Scale in Workers with Traumatic Limb Injuries

Process Evaluation of a Workplace Integrated Care Intervention for Workers with Rheumatoid Arthritis