Asian Spine Journal

Korean Society of Spine Surgery (대한척추외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Development of a Modified Disability Questionnaire for Evaluating Disability Caused by Backache in India and Other Developing Countries

  • Aithala, Janardhana P. (Department of Orthopedics, Yenepoya Medical College) ;
  • Kumar, Suraj (Kasturba Medical College) ;
  • Aithal, Shodhan (Kasturba Medical College) ;
  • Kotian, Shashidhar M. (Kasturba Medical College)
  • Received : 2018.01.06
  • Accepted : 2018.04.29
  • Published : 2018.12.31
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Study Design: Prospective observational study. Purpose: To evaluate the disability domains relevant to Indian patients with low backache and propose a modified disability questionnaire for such patients. Overview of Literature: The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is a self-reported measurement tool that measures both pain and functional status and is used for evaluating disability caused by lower backache. Although ODI remains a good tool for disability assessment, from the Indian perspective questions related to weight lifting and sexual activity of ODI are questioned in some of the earlier studies. Activities of daily living in Indian patients vary substantially from those in other populations and include activities like bending forwards, sitting in floor and squatting which are not represented in the ODI. Methods: In this prospective observational study, a seven-step approach was used for the development of a questionnaire. Thirty patients were interviewed to identify the most challenging issue they faced while performing their daily activities (by free listing) and understand how important the questionnaire items were in terms of the standard ODI. Thus, a comprehensive disability questionnaire comprising 14 questions was developed and administered to 88 patients. Both qualitative (interviews) and quantitative methods (to establish the validity, reliability, and correlation with the Visual Analog Scale [VAS] and Rolland Morris disability questionnaire) were used to identify the 10 questions that best addressed the disability domains relevant to Indian patients. Results: According to free listing, four new questions pertaining to bending forward, sitting on the floor, walking on uneven surfaces, and work-related disabilities were included. In the second phase, wherein the questionnaire with 14 items was used, 56.8% patients did not answer the questions related to sexual activity, whereas 23.8% did not answer those related to walking on uneven surfaces. The modified questionnaire demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.892) and correlation with the Rolland Morris questionnaire (Cronbach's alpha=0.850, p>0.05), as well as with the VAS score for disability (Cronbach's alpha=0.712, p>0.05) and pain (Cronbach's alpha=0.625, p>0.05). Conclusions: A modified disability questionnaire that was designed by adding two questions related to bending forward and work status and removing questions related to sexual activity and weight lifting or traveling (depending on the occupation) can help evaluate disability caused by back pain in Indian population.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : Manipal Academy of Higher Education

References

  1. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O'Brien JP. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 1980;66:271-3.
  2. Bombardier C. Outcome assessments in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders: summary and general recommendations. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:3100-3. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00003
  3. Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJ, et al. Outcome measures for low back pain research: a proposal for standardized use. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1998;23:2003-13. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199809150-00018
  4. Doleys DM, Klapow JC, Hammer M. Psychological evaluation in spinal cord stimulation therapy. Pain Rev 1997;4:189-207.
  5. Turk DC, Marcus DA. Assessment of chronic pain patients. Semin Neurol 1994;14:206-12. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1041079
  6. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry disability index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:2940-52. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017
  7. Fisher K, Johnston M. Validation of the Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire, its sensitivity as a measure of change following treatment and its relationship with other aspects of the chronic pain experience. Physiother Theory Pract 1997;13:67-80. https://doi.org/10.3109/09593989709036449
  8. Costa M, Marshman LA. Sex life and the Oswestry Disability Index. Spine J 2015;15:1225-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2015.02.022
  9. Hudson-Cook N, Tomes-Nicholson K, Breen A. A revised Oswestry disability questionnaire. In: Roland M, Jenner JR, editors. Back pain: new approaches to rehabilitation and education. Manchester: Manchester University Press; 1989. p.187-204.
  10. 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;81:776-88. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/81.2.776
  11. Fairbank J. Use of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995;20:1535-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199507000-00020
  12. Daltroy LH, Cats-Baril WL, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Liang MH. The North American Spine Society lumbar spine outcome assessment instrument: reliability and validity tests. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996;21:741-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199603150-00017
  13. Nishant, Chhabra HS, Kapoor KS. New modified English and Hindi Oswestry disability index in low back pain patients treated conservatively in Indian population. Asian Spine J 2014;8632-8.
  14. Aithala JP. Difficulties in using Oswestry Disability Index in Indian patients and validity and reliability of translator-assisted Oswestry Disability Index. J Orthop Surg Res 2015;10:90. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-015-0230-8
  15. Mulholland SJ, Wyss UP. Activities of daily living in non-Western cultures: range of motion requirements for hip and knee joint implants. Int J Rehabil Res 2001;24:191-8. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004356-200109000-00004
  16. Chopra A, Saluja M, Patil J, Tandale HS. Pain and disability, perceptions and beliefs of a rural Indian population: a WHO-ILAR COPCORD study. WHOInternational League of Associations for Rheumatology. Community Oriented Program for Control of Rheumatic Diseases. J Rheumatol 2002;29:614-21.
  17. Kopec JA, Esdaile JM, Abrahamowicz M, et al. The Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: measurement properties. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1995;20:341-52. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199502000-00016
  18. Roland M, Morris R. A study of the natural history of back pain: part I: development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1983;8:141-4. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198303000-00004
  19. Gehlbach H, Artino AR Jr, Durning S. AM last page: survey development guidance for medical education researchers. Acad Med 2010;85:925. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181dd3e88
  20. Boonstra AM, Schiphorst Preuper HR, Reneman MF, Posthumus JB, Stewart RE. Reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale for disability in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Int J Rehabil Res 2008;31:165-9. https://doi.org/10.1097/MRR.0b013e3282fc0f93
  21. Sharma R. Epidemiology of musculoskeletal conditions in India. New Delhi: Indian Council of Medical Research ; 2012.
  22. Vianin M. Psychometric properties and clinical usefulness of the Oswestry Disability Index. J Chiropr Med 2008;7:161-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2008.07.001
  23. McGirt MJ, Bydon M, Archer KR, et al. An analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database: part 1: disability, quality of life, and pain outcomes following lumbar spine surgery: predicting likely individual patient outcomes for shared decision-making. J Neurosurg Spine 2017;27:357-69. https://doi.org/10.3171/2016.11.SPINE16526
  24. Frost MH, Reeve BB, Liepa AM, Stauffer JW, Hays RD; Mayo/FDA Patient-Reported Outcomes Consensus Meeting Group. What is sufficient evidence for the reliability and validity of patient-reported outcome measures? Value Health 2007;10 Suppl 2:S94-S105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00272.x