Susan Robarts, Helen Razmjou, Albert Yee, Joel Finkelstein
{"title":"Risk Stratification in a Tertiary Care Spine Centre: Comparison Between STarTBack and OSPRO-YF Screening Tools.","authors":"Susan Robarts, Helen Razmjou, Albert Yee, Joel Finkelstein","doi":"10.3138/ptc-2021-0026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>STarT Back Screening Tool and OSPRO-YF scales have been reported to be accurate tools for estimating risk for the development of persistent pain or prolonged disability in primary care settings. We performed a comparison of construct convergent and known-group validity and ceiling floor effect (CFE) of these tools using a common sample of patients seen at a tertiary care spine centre.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a cross-sectional study of patients with and without a work-related back injury. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was used as the reference outcome measure for convergent validity. For known-group validity, we examined the ability of the scales to differentiate between different levels of compensation, presence of non-organic signs, and work status. The CFE values were calculated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty consecutive injured workers were included along with 50 patients without an active compensation claim related to their low back pain. STarTBack and OSPRO-YF had moderate to high associations with the depression component of the HADS (0.69 to 0.77 respectively) with a statistically significant difference in favour of the OSPRO-YF. STarTBack's risk stratification categories were able to differentiate patients with a compensable injury, non-organic signs, and inability to work (<i>p</i> values ranging from 0.002 to < 0.001). The physical activity and work fear-avoidance beliefs constructs of the OSPRO-YF consistently outperformed other yellow flag constructs (<i>p</i> values ranging from 0.008 to < 0.001). The psychological sub-score of STarTBack showed a ceiling effect. There was a floor effect for the negative affect domain of OSPRO-YF. Neither total score had a floor or ceiling effect.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>STarTBack and OSPRO-YF are short screening tools with acceptable convergent and known-group construct validity and no floor or ceiling effect of their total score. Both tools could assist with the identification, evaluation, and management of psychological distress in patients presenting to tertiary care spine centres.</p>","PeriodicalId":54606,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy Canada","volume":"75 2","pages":"158-166"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10510560/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy Canada","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/ptc-2021-0026","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: STarT Back Screening Tool and OSPRO-YF scales have been reported to be accurate tools for estimating risk for the development of persistent pain or prolonged disability in primary care settings. We performed a comparison of construct convergent and known-group validity and ceiling floor effect (CFE) of these tools using a common sample of patients seen at a tertiary care spine centre.
Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of patients with and without a work-related back injury. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was used as the reference outcome measure for convergent validity. For known-group validity, we examined the ability of the scales to differentiate between different levels of compensation, presence of non-organic signs, and work status. The CFE values were calculated.
Results: Fifty consecutive injured workers were included along with 50 patients without an active compensation claim related to their low back pain. STarTBack and OSPRO-YF had moderate to high associations with the depression component of the HADS (0.69 to 0.77 respectively) with a statistically significant difference in favour of the OSPRO-YF. STarTBack's risk stratification categories were able to differentiate patients with a compensable injury, non-organic signs, and inability to work (p values ranging from 0.002 to < 0.001). The physical activity and work fear-avoidance beliefs constructs of the OSPRO-YF consistently outperformed other yellow flag constructs (p values ranging from 0.008 to < 0.001). The psychological sub-score of STarTBack showed a ceiling effect. There was a floor effect for the negative affect domain of OSPRO-YF. Neither total score had a floor or ceiling effect.
Conclusions: STarTBack and OSPRO-YF are short screening tools with acceptable convergent and known-group construct validity and no floor or ceiling effect of their total score. Both tools could assist with the identification, evaluation, and management of psychological distress in patients presenting to tertiary care spine centres.
期刊介绍：
Physiotherapy Canada is the official, scholarly, refereed journal of the Canadian Physiotherapy Association (CPA), giving direction to excellence in clinical science and reasoning, knowledge translation, therapeutic skills and patient-centred care.
Founded in 1923, Physiotherapy Canada meets the diverse needs of national and international readers and serves as a key repository of inquiries, evidence and advances in the practice of physiotherapy.
Physiotherapy Canada publishes the results of qualitative and quantitative research including systematic reviews, meta analyses, meta syntheses, public/health policy research, clinical practice guidelines, and case reports. Key messages, clinical commentaries, brief reports and book reviews support knowledge translation to clinical practice.
In addition to delivering authoritative, original scientific articles and reports of significant clinical studies, Physiotherapy Canada’s editorials and abstracts are presented in both English and French, expanding the journal’s reach nationally and internationally. Key messages form an integral part of each research article, providing a succinct summary for readers of all levels. This approach also allows readers to quickly get a feel for ‘what is already known’ and ‘what this study adds to’ the subject.
Clinician’s commentaries for key articles assist in bridging research and practice by discussing the article’s impact at the clinical level. The journal also features special themed series which bring readers up to date research supporting evidence-informed practice.
The Canadian Physiotherapy Association (CPA) is the national professional association representing almost 15,000 members distributed throughout all provinces and territories. CPA’s mission is to provide leadership and direction to the physiotherapy profession, foster excellence in practice, education and research, and promote high standards of health in Canada.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
