Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 8/2008

01-08-2008 | Original Article

Responsiveness of the Brazilian–Portuguese version of the Oswestry Disability Index in subjects with low back pain

Authors: Rodrigo A. Coelho, Fabiano B. Siqueira, Paulo H. Ferreira, Manuela L. Ferreira

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 8/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

When quality of life questionnaires are used as measures of treatment outcomes, it is essential to know how well these can respond to clinical changes. The objective of this study is to examine the responsiveness of the Brazilian–Portuguese version of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI-Brazil) in subjects with chronic low back pain submitted to a physical therapy program. Thirty subjects with chronic low back pain completed the ODI-Brazil questionnaire, along with an 11-point pain visual analogue scale (Pain VAS), and the Brazilian–Portuguese version of Roland–Morris disability questionnaire before and after the program. All patients also completed a global perception of change Likert scale in condition after the program. This scale was collapsed to produce a dichotomous variable outcome: improved and non-improved. Responsiveness was determined using effect size statistics and receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC curve), with best cut-point analysis. The best change score cut-off was identified when equally balanced sensitivity and specificity was found, as an expression of the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). After treatment, 19 patients considered themselves improved. Both the effect size (0.37) and the area under the ROC curve (0.73) for ODI-Brazil score in relation to global outcome after program indicated that the ODI-Brazil showed responsiveness. The ROC curve for ODI-Brazil was distributed at the upper corners of the diagonal line, indicating that the questionnaire presents discriminative ability. The best cut-off point for ODI-Brazil was approximately 4.45 points (63.2% sensitivity, 81.8% specificity). The Brazilian–Portuguese version of ODI has comparable responsiveness to other commonly used functional status measures and is appropriate for use in chronic low back pain patients receiving conservative care.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Anderson G (1999) Epidemiological features of chronic low-back pain. Lancet 354:581–585CrossRef Anderson G (1999) Epidemiological features of chronic low-back pain. Lancet 354:581–585CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Beaton DE (2000) Understanding the relevance of measured change through studies of responsiveness. Spine 25:3192–3199CrossRefPubMed Beaton DE (2000) Understanding the relevance of measured change through studies of responsiveness. Spine 25:3192–3199CrossRefPubMed
3.
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
4.
go back to reference Bombardier C (2000) Outcome assessments in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders: summary and general recommendations. Spine 25:3100–3103CrossRefPubMed Bombardier C (2000) Outcome assessments in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders: summary and general recommendations. Spine 25:3100–3103CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Chibnall JT, Tait RC, Andresen EM (2005) Race and socioeconomic differences in post-settlement outcomes for African-American and Caucasian workers compensation claimants with low back injuries. Pain 114:462–472CrossRefPubMed Chibnall JT, Tait RC, Andresen EM (2005) Race and socioeconomic differences in post-settlement outcomes for African-American and Caucasian workers compensation claimants with low back injuries. Pain 114:462–472CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Davidson M, Keating J (2002) A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness. Phys Ther 82(1):8–24PubMed Davidson M, Keating J (2002) A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness. Phys Ther 82(1):8–24PubMed
7.
go back to reference Deyo RA, Centor RM (1986) Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis 39:897–906CrossRefPubMed Deyo RA, Centor RM (1986) Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis 39:897–906CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Deyo RA, Diehr P, Patrick DL (1991) Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin Trials 12 (Suppl 4):S142–S158CrossRef Deyo RA, Diehr P, Patrick DL (1991) Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin Trials 12 (Suppl 4):S142–S158CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O’Brien JP (1980) The Oswestry low back pain questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66:271–273PubMed Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O’Brien JP (1980) The Oswestry low back pain questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66:271–273PubMed
11.
go back to reference Farrar JT, Portenoy RK, Berlin JA, Kinman JL, Strom BL (2000) Defining the clinically important difference in pain outcome measures. Pain 88:287–294CrossRefPubMed Farrar JT, Portenoy RK, Berlin JA, Kinman JL, Strom BL (2000) Defining the clinically important difference in pain outcome measures. Pain 88:287–294CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Protocol FDA, G000137 (2002) A prospective, randomized clinical investigation of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 and compression resistant matrix with the CD Horizon spinal system for posterolateral lumbar fusion in patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis Protocol FDA, G000137 (2002) A prospective, randomized clinical investigation of recombinant human bone morphogenetic protein-2 and compression resistant matrix with the CD Horizon spinal system for posterolateral lumbar fusion in patients with symptomatic degenerative disc disease. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis
13.
go back to reference Fischer D, Stewart AL, Bloch DA, Lorig K, Laurent D, Holman H (1999) Capturing the patient’s view of change as a clinical outcome measure. JAMA 282:1157–1162CrossRefPubMed Fischer D, Stewart AL, Bloch DA, Lorig K, Laurent D, Holman H (1999) Capturing the patient’s view of change as a clinical outcome measure. JAMA 282:1157–1162CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Frymoyer JW, Pope MH, Clements JH (1983) Risk factors in low-back pain: an epidemiological survey. J Bone Joint Surg Am 65:213–218PubMed Frymoyer JW, Pope MH, Clements JH (1983) Risk factors in low-back pain: an epidemiological survey. J Bone Joint Surg Am 65:213–218PubMed
15.
go back to reference Grotle M, Brox JI, Vollestad NK (2004) Concurrent comparison of responsiveness in pain and functional status measurements used for patients with low back pain. Spine 29:E492–E501CrossRefPubMed Grotle M, Brox JI, Vollestad NK (2004) Concurrent comparison of responsiveness in pain and functional status measurements used for patients with low back pain. Spine 29:E492–E501CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Grotle M, Brox JI, Vollestad NK (2005) Functional status and disability questionnaires: what do they assess? A systematic review of back-specific outcome questionnaires. Spine 30:130–140CrossRefPubMed Grotle M, Brox JI, Vollestad NK (2005) Functional status and disability questionnaires: what do they assess? A systematic review of back-specific outcome questionnaires. Spine 30:130–140CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Hägg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A (2003) The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12:12–20PubMed Hägg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A (2003) The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12:12–20PubMed
18.
go back to reference Lauridsen HH, Hartvigsen J, Manniche C, Korsholm L, Grunnet-Nilsson N (2006) Danish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Part 2: sensitivity, specificity and clinically significant improvement in two low back pain populations. Eur Spine J 15:1717–1728CrossRefPubMed Lauridsen HH, Hartvigsen J, Manniche C, Korsholm L, Grunnet-Nilsson N (2006) Danish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Part 2: sensitivity, specificity and clinically significant improvement in two low back pain populations. Eur Spine J 15:1717–1728CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Loney PL, Stratford PW (1999) The prevalence of low back pain in adults: a methodological review of the literature. Phys Ther 79:384–396PubMed Loney PL, Stratford PW (1999) The prevalence of low back pain in adults: a methodological review of the literature. Phys Ther 79:384–396PubMed
20.
go back to reference Mannion AF, Junge A, Grob D, Dvorak J, Fairbank JC (2006) Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 2: sensitivity to change after spinal surgery. Eur Spine J 15(1):66–73CrossRefPubMed Mannion AF, Junge A, Grob D, Dvorak J, Fairbank JC (2006) Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 2: sensitivity to change after spinal surgery. Eur Spine J 15(1):66–73CrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Nusbaum L, Natour J, Ferraz MB, Goldenberg J (2001) Translation, adaptation and validation of the Roland–Morris questionnaire-Brazil Roland Morris. Braz J Med Biol Res 34:203–210CrossRefPubMed Nusbaum L, Natour J, Ferraz MB, Goldenberg J (2001) Translation, adaptation and validation of the Roland–Morris questionnaire-Brazil Roland Morris. Braz J Med Biol Res 34:203–210CrossRefPubMed
22.
go back to reference Perillo M, Bulbulian R (2003) Responsiveness of Bournemouth and Oswestry Questionnaires: a prospective pilot study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 26:77–86CrossRefPubMed Perillo M, Bulbulian R (2003) Responsiveness of Bournemouth and Oswestry Questionnaires: a prospective pilot study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 26:77–86CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Rantanen P (2001) Physical measurements and questionnaires as diagnostic tools in chronic low back pain. J Rehabil Med 33:31–35CrossRefPubMed Rantanen P (2001) Physical measurements and questionnaires as diagnostic tools in chronic low back pain. J Rehabil Med 33:31–35CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Roland M, Fairbank JC (2000) The Roland–Morris disability questionnaire and the Oswestry disability questionnaire. Spine 25:3115–3124CrossRefPubMed Roland M, Fairbank JC (2000) The Roland–Morris disability questionnaire and the Oswestry disability questionnaire. Spine 25:3115–3124CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL, Guyatt GH (1998) Sensitivity to change of the Roland–Morris back pain questionnaire: part 1. Phys Ther 78:1186–1196PubMed Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL, Guyatt GH (1998) Sensitivity to change of the Roland–Morris back pain questionnaire: part 1. Phys Ther 78:1186–1196PubMed
26.
go back to reference Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Solomon P, Gill C, Finch E (1994) Assessing change over time in patients with low back pain. Phys Ther 74:528–533PubMed Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Solomon P, Gill C, Finch E (1994) Assessing change over time in patients with low back pain. Phys Ther 74:528–533PubMed
27.
go back to reference Suarez-Almazor ME, Kendall C, Johnson JA, Skeith K, Vincent D (2000) Use of health status measures in patients with low back pain in clinical settings. Comparison of specific, generic and preference-based instruments. Rheumatology 39:783–790CrossRefPubMed Suarez-Almazor ME, Kendall C, Johnson JA, Skeith K, Vincent D (2000) Use of health status measures in patients with low back pain in clinical settings. Comparison of specific, generic and preference-based instruments. Rheumatology 39:783–790CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Vigatto R, Alexandre NMC, Filho HR (2007) Development of a Brazilian Portuguese version of the Oswestry Disability Index—cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity. Spine 32(4):481–486CrossRefPubMed Vigatto R, Alexandre NMC, Filho HR (2007) Development of a Brazilian Portuguese version of the Oswestry Disability Index—cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity. Spine 32(4):481–486CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Walsh TL, Hanscom B, Lurie JD, Weinsteim J (2003) Is a condition-specific instrument for patients with low back pain/leg symptoms really necessary? Spine 28(6):607–615PubMed Walsh TL, Hanscom B, Lurie JD, Weinsteim J (2003) Is a condition-specific instrument for patients with low back pain/leg symptoms really necessary? Spine 28(6):607–615PubMed
Metadata
Title
Responsiveness of the Brazilian–Portuguese version of the Oswestry Disability Index in subjects with low back pain
Authors
Rodrigo A. Coelho
Fabiano B. Siqueira
Paulo H. Ferreira
Manuela L. Ferreira
Publication date
01-08-2008
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 8/2008
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-008-0690-1

Other articles of this Issue 8/2008

European Spine Journal 8/2008 Go to the issue