Physical Therapy Korea (한국전문물리치료학회지)

Korean Research Society of Physical Therapy (한국전문물리치료학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Selecting Common Items for Linking the Oswestry Low Back Pain Questionnaire and a Short Form of Self-Reported Activity Measure for Low Back Pain

  • Choi, Bong-sam (Dept. of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Welfare, Woosong University)
  • Received : 2015.06.22
  • Accepted : 2015.07.23
  • Published : 2015.09.17
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

To develop an effective and efficient measurement system for tracking changes of functional status across two measures, it is essential to integrate information and communicate scores across two measures. The lack of communication between two measures leads to score incompatibility. A potential solution would be the development of a crosswalk table between those measures. Prior to creating a crosswalk table, selecting common items between two measures is critical. By using the Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire (Oswestry) and a short form measuring disability resulting from low back pain, item level statistics as well as differential item functioning (DIF) using the Rasch measurement were investigated. Eighty-two participants with known group validity were recruited. Based on the application of the Rasch measurement model, item difficulties across the two measures were logically and hierarchically ordered. Ceiling effects for both measures were detected, which were not be able to be effectively measured with the two measures. The DIF analysis across the two measures confirmed that five paired items were found to have DIF and five common items were selected for common items. Although five paired items function differently across the Oswestry and the short form, all items of both measures were well targeted study participants. The common items selected by the Rasch measurement model may be effective when creating a crosswalk table between the Oswestry and the short form.

Keywords

References

  1. Bond TG, Fox CM. Applying the Rasch Model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences. 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, 2001:23-28.
  2. Choi BS. Computer adaptive testing method for measuring disability in patients with back pain. Phys Ther Korea. 2012;19(3):124-131. http://dx.doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2012.19.3.124
  3. Choi BS. The use of rasch model in developing a short form based on self-reported activity measure for low back pain. Phys Ther Korea. 2014;21(4):56-66. http://dx.doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2014.21.4.056
  4. Davidson M. Rasch analysis of three versions of the oswestry disability questionnaire. Man Ther. 2008;13(3):222-231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2007.01.008
  5. DeVellis RF. Classical test theory. Med Care. 2006; 44(11 suppl 3):S50-S59. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000245426.10853.30
  6. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, et al. The oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy. 1980;66(8):271-273.
  7. Finch WH, Hernandez Finch ME. Differential item functioning analysis using a multilevel rasch mixture model: Investigating the impact of disability status and receipt of testing accommodations. J Appl Meas. 2014;15(2):133-151.
  8. Fleishman JA, Lawrence WF. Demographic variation in SF-12 scores: True differences or differential item functioning? Med Care. 2003;41(7 suppl):III75-III86.
  9. Fritz JM, Irrgang JJ. A comparison of a modified oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire and the quebec back pain disability scale. Phys Ther. 2001;81(2):776-788. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/81.2.776
  10. Haley SM, Andres PL, Coster WJ, et al. Short-form activity measure for post-acute care. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(4):649-660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2003.08.098
  11. Hambleton RK. Emergence of item response modeling in instrument development and data analysis. Med Care. 2000;38(9 suppl):II60-II65.
  12. Huang HY. Effects of the common scale setting in the assessment of differential item functioning. Psychol Rep. 2014;114(1):104-125. https://doi.org/10.2466/03.PR0.114k11w0
  13. Kolen MJ. Linking assessments: Concept and history. Appl Psychol Meas. 2004;28(4):219-226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621604265030
  14. Lu YM, Wu YY, Hsieh CL, et al. Measurement precision of the disability for back pain scale-by applying rasch analysis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;11:119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-11-119
  15. Mallinson T, Stelmack JA, Velozo CA. A comparison of the separation ratio and coefficient alpha in the creation of minimum item sets. Med Care. 2004;42(1 suppl):I17-I24.
  16. McHorney CA. Use of item response theory to link 3 modules of functional status items from the asset and health dynamics among the oldest old study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83(3):383-394. https://doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.29610
  17. McHorney CA, Cohen AS. Equating health status measures with item response theory: Illustrations with functional status items. Med Care. 2000; 38(9 suppl):II43-II59.
  18. Nyein K, McMichael L, Turner-Stokes L. Can a barthel score be derived from the FIM? Clin Rehabil. 1999;13(1):56-63. https://doi.org/10.1191/026921599701532135
  19. Smith RM, Kramer GA. A comparison of two methods of test equating in the rasch model. Educ Psychol Meas. 1992;52(4):835-846. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164492052004004
  20. Taherbhai HM, Young MJ. Pre-equating: A simulation study based on a large scale assessment model. J Appl Measure. 2004;5(3):301-318.
  21. Teresi JA. Statistical methods for examination of differential item functioning (DIF) with applications to cross-cultural measurement of functional, physical and mental health. J Mental Health Aging. 2001;7(1):31-40.
  22. Velozo CA, Byers KL, Wang YC, et al. Translating measures across the continuum of care: Using rasch analysis to create a crosswalk between the functional independence measure and the minimum data set. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2007; 44(3):467-478. https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2006.06.0068
  23. Velozo CA, Choi B, Zylstra SE, et al. Measurement qualities of a self-report and therapist-scored functional capacity instrument based on the dictionary of occupational titles. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16(1):109-122.
  24. Velozo CA, Lai JS, Mallinson T, et al. Maintaining instrument quality while reducing items: Application of rasch analysis to a self-report of visual function. J Outcome Meas. 2000;4(3):667-680.
  25. Wang YC, Byers KL, Velozo CA. Validation of FIM-MDS crosswalk conversion algorythm. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2008;45(7):1065-76. https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2007.12.0211
  26. White LJ, Velozo CA. The use of rasch measurement to improve the oswestry classification scheme. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83(6):822-831. https://doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.32685
  27. Williams BC, Li Y, Fries BE, et al. Predicting patient scores between the functional independence measure and the minimum data set: Development and performance of FIM-MDS "crosswalk". Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78(1):48-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(97)90009-5
  28. Wright BD, Linacre JM. Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Meas Trans. 1994;8(3):370.
  29. Wright BD, Stone MH. Best test design. Rasch measurement. Chicago, IL, MESA press, 1979:93-95.