Measures of function in low back pain/disorders: Low Back Pain Rating Scale (LBPRS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Progressive Isoinertial Lifting Evaluation (PILE), Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS), and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire

2011 ◽  
Vol 63 (S11) ◽  
pp. S158-S173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob Smeets ◽  
Albere Köke ◽  
Chung-Wei Lin ◽  
Manuela Ferreira ◽  
Christophe Demoulin
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Oswestry Disability Index ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Rating ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Disability Scale ◽  
Disability Questionnaire ◽  
Pain Rating Scale

scholarly journals Responsiveness of pain, functional capacity tests, and disability level in individuals with chronic nonspecific low back pain

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (01) ◽  
pp. 11-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prasert Sakulsriprasert ◽  
Roongtiwa Vachalathiti ◽  
Pathaimas Kingcha
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Rating ◽  
Sit To Stand ◽  
Numeric Pain Rating Scale ◽  
Pain Rating Scale ◽  
Disability Level

Background: Clinical outcomes are very important in clinical assessment, and responsiveness is a component inside the outcome measures that needs to be investigated, particularly in chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP). Objective: This study aimed to investigate the responsiveness of pain, functional capacity tests, and disability in individuals with CNSLBP. Methods: Twenty subjects were assessed in pain using the following methods: visual analog scale (VAS) and numeric pain rating scale (NPRS), functional capacity tests: functional reach test (FRT), five-time sit-to-stand test (5 TSST), and two-minute step test (2 MST), and disability level: modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (MODQ), Thai version before and after 2-week intervention session. For interventions, the subjects received education, spinal manipulative therapy, and individual therapeutic exercise twice a week, for a total of two weeks. The statistics analyzed were change scores, effect size (ES), and standardized response mean (SRM). Results: The most responsive parameter for individuals with CNSLBP was pain as measured by numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) (ES [Formula: see text]0.986, SRM [Formula: see text]0.928) and five-time sit-to-stand test (5 TSST) (SRM [Formula: see text]0.846). Conclusion: This study found that NPRS pain and 5 TSST were responsive in individuals with CNSLBP at two weeks after the beginning of interventions.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of kinesiotherapy in chronic non-specific low back pain

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 35-42
Author(s):  
Vladimir A. Parfenov ◽  
Irina A. Lamkova
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Patient Group ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Emotional State ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Long Term Treatment ◽  
Disability Questionnaire

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of physical therapy (kinesiotherapy or KT) for chronic non-specific low back pain (CNSLBP) in managing pain, improving functional and emotional state, and overall physical activity. Materials and methods. The study included 71 patients (17 men and 54 women) aged 1875 years (mean age 55.09 13.0 years) with CNSLBP, of whom 34 patients received standard KT and 37 patients received enhanced KT. Patients were asked to complete the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS), and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ-SF) at baseline, after 7 days and 90 days. Results. In patients who received treatment, we observed a reduction in pain intensity as measured by the NPRS, from a score of 8 at baseline (68) to 3 (24) points after 7 days and down to 2 (04) after 3 months (p 0.0001). Depression severity decreased from 7 (59) points to 5 (37) after 7 days (p = 0.002) and 4 (36) points after 90 days (p = 0.002). Anxiety decreased from 7 (510) to 6 (48) after 7 days (p = 0.0003) and 5 (37) points after 90 days (p = 0.0003). The Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire score decreased from 46% (3457.77) to 28% (1235.55) after 7 days (p 0.0001), and then to 11.11% (4.4426) after 90 days (p 0.0001). Physical activity as measured by the IPAQ-SF increased from 11 (716) to 16 (1319) points after 7 days (p = 0.001) and to 23 (1526) points after 90 days (p = 0.0002). The patient group receiving enhanced KT had a more significant reduction in pain as measured by the NPRS after 7 days and 3 months (p = 0.02 and p = 0.055, respectively), depression as measured by the HADS (p 0.05), and disability as measured by the Oswestry Questionnaire (p = 0.015), accompanied by an increase in physical activity as measured by the IPAQ-SF after 90 days (p = 0.0002), as compared to the patient group receiving standard KT. Conclusion. KT not only reduces pain but also improves the functional and emotional state, and increases physical activity in patients with CNSLBP. Enhancing KT by using a personalized approach and educational programmes improves long-term treatment outcomes.

scholarly journals Psychometric testing of Ibadan low back pain disability questionnaire

2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 110-113
Author(s):  
Bolanle Nottidge ◽  
Matthew Akpa ◽  
Nse Odunaiya ◽  
Adesola Odole ◽  
Olufunmilayo Fawole ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Outcome Measure ◽  
Psychometric Testing ◽  
Test Reliability ◽  
Initial Assessment ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Disability Questionnaire

Background: The Ibadan Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (ILBPDQ) was developed to meet the need for a LBP treatment outcome measure that was appropriate for the Nigerian culture and environment. The objective of this study was to determine the psychometric properties of ILBPDQ.Methods: This study used the validation design. One hundred and forty-two participants with LBP (LBPPs) and 142 age and sex-matched participants without LBP (NLBPPs) were included. The LBPPs were recruited consecutively from Physiotherapy clinics of selected tertiary hospitals in the six geopolitical zones of Nigeria. Both LBPPs and NLBPPs completed the ILBPDQ - the LBPPs completed the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS). The ILBPDQ was completed by 113 LBPPs two days after initial assessment. Sixty-four of the LBPPs received physiotherapy for 5-weeks, after which they were reassessed using ILBPDQ and NPRS.Results: ILBPDQ score of LBPPs was significantly higher than that of NLBPPs (construct validity) and LBPPs NPRS score correlated significantly with their ILBPDQ score (r = 0.50) at baseline and post intervention (r =0.35) (divergent validity). ILBPDQ scores at baseline and 48 hours later for LBPPs correlated significantly (Intra Class Correlation =0.80) (test re -test reliability). Cronbach’s α for ILBPDQ was 0.84 (internal consistency). The postintervention ILBPDQ and NPRS scores for LBPPs were significantly lower than their pre-intervention ILBPDQ scores (responsiveness) and NPRS scores. The changes in ILBPDQ and NPRS scores of the LBPPs correlated significantly (r =0.62) (responsiveness).Conclusion: The ILBPDQ demonstrated evidence of validity, reliability and responsiveness.Keywords: Low back pain, Functional disability, Outcome measure, Psychometric testing, NigeriaFunding: University of Ibadan Senate Research Grant.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Five Low Back Disability Questionnaires: Reliability and Responsiveness

2002 ◽  
Vol 82 (1) ◽  
pp. 8-24 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan Davidson ◽  
Jennifer L Keating
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Bodily Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Disability Scale ◽  
Pain Scales ◽  
Sf 36 ◽  
Disability Questionnaire ◽  
Oswestry Disability Questionnaire

Abstract Background and Purpose. The aim of this study was to examine 5 commonly used questionnaires for assessing disability in people with low back pain. The modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, the Waddell Disability Index, and the physical health scales of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) were compared in patients undergoing physical therapy for low back pain. Subjects and Methods. Patients with low back pain completed the questionnaires during initial consultation with a physical therapist and again 6 weeks later (n=106). Test-retest reliability was examined for a group of 47 subjects who were classified as “unchanged” and a subgroup of 16 subjects who were self-rated as “about the same.” Responsiveness was compared using standardized response means, receiver operating characteristic curves, and the proportions of subjects who changed by at least as much as the minimum detectable change (MDC) (90% confidence interval [CI] of the standard error for repeated measures). Scale width was judged as adequate if no more than 15% of the subjects had initial scores at the upper or lower end of the scale that were insufficient to allow change to be reliably detected. Results. Intraclass correlation coefficients (2,1) calculated to measure reliability for the subjects who were classified as “unchanged” and those who were self-rated as “about the same” were greater than .80 for the Oswestry and Quebec questionnaires and the SF-36 Physical Functioning scale and less than .80 for the Waddell and Roland-Morris questionnaires and the SF-36 Role Limitations–Physical and Bodily Pain scales. None of the scales were more responsive than any other. Discussion and Conclusion. Measurements obtained with the modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, the SF-36 Physical Functioning scale, and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale were the most reliable and had sufficient width scale to reliably detect improvement or worsening in most subjects. The reliability of measurements obtained with the Waddell Disability Index was moderate, but the scale appeared to be insufficient to recommend it for clinical application. The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Role Limitations–Physical and Bodily Pain scales of the SF-36 appeared to lack sufficient reliability and scale width for clinical application.

scholarly journals Effects of bridging and V-sitting exercises on pain intensity and disability of patients with non-specific chronic low-back pain

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-144
Author(s):  
Adesola O. Ojoawo ◽  
◽  
Abdullai A. Igbemo ◽  
Timothy Adeyemi ◽  
Matthew OB. Olaogun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Exercise Group ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Disability ◽  
Alpha Level ◽  
Disability Questionnaire

Introduction. Exercises are important in the management of non-specific chronic low-back pain (NSCLBP). Aim. The study compared the effects of bridging and V-sitting exercises on pain and disability of patients with NSCLBP. Material and methods. 34 patients with NSCLBP recruited for the study were allocated into V-sitting (VSG) and Bridging Exercise group (BEG) equally. Participants in VSG and BEG groups performed V-sitting and bridging exercises respectively for 10 seconds, three times in a week for three weeks under a supervision of one of the authors. Each participants underwent ten sessions per a treatment regimen. Pain intensity and disability were assessed at the pre-intervention, second and third weeks using verbal rating scale and Rolland Morris Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire prospectively. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, alpha level was set at 0.05 Results. There was a significant reduction in the third week (P < 0.001) in both VSG and BEG group of pain intensity and disability comparing the pre intervention, second and third week values. There was a significant reduction in the 3rd week VSG’s pain intensity (F=27.34 P<0.001) and disability (F=14.96, P<0.001) compared with BEG. Conclusion. V-sitting and bridging exercises were effective in management of patients with NSCLP, but V-sitting seems more effective.

Low Back Pain Rating scale: validation of a tool for assessment of low back pain

Pain ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 317-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claus Manniche ◽  
Karsten Asmussen ◽  
Birgitte Lauritsen ◽  
Henrik Vinterberg ◽  
Svend Kreiner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Scale Validation ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Pain Rating ◽  
Pain Rating Scale
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document