肩腰痛患者特异性功能量表变化的构形有效性和有效性的临床研究

Kromer To, J. Saner, Sieben Jm, Bastiaenen Chg
{"title":"肩腰痛患者特异性功能量表变化的构形有效性和有效性的临床研究","authors":"Kromer To, J. Saner, Sieben Jm, Bastiaenen Chg","doi":"10.26420/physmedrehabilint.2021.1181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Patient-specific and condition-specific measures are widely used in clinical practice and research to measure disability or change over time. While condition-specific outcome measures comprise a range of restrictions generally relevant for all patients, the Patient-Specific Functional Scale measures restrictions chosen by the individual patient. Objectives: Based on the hypothesis that patient-specific and conditionspecific scales deliver comparable results when used on group level. The aim of this study was to test for floor and ceiling effects, to evaluate construct validity and validity to change of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale when compared to condition-specific outcome measures. For this purpose, two datasets from patients with shoulder pain and low back pain were analyzed. Methods: Patient-Specific Functional Scale scores were compared to the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire at 4 time-points using stem-and-leaf-plots and correlations using Pearson’s r. Hypothesis-driven correlation levels for data interpretation were predefined, with r ≥0.75=high, r ≥0.5=moderate, r ≥0.25=low. Results: Patient-Specific Functional Scale floor effects were comparable to condition-specific outcome measures in both samples. At none of the timepoints did the Patient-Specific Functional Scale correlate with the conditionspecific outcome measures in the expected manner. Conclusion: Hypotheses regarding expected ranges of correlation between the Patient-Specific Functional Scale and the condition-specific outcome measures for construct validity and validity to change were not met. While the use of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in a clinical context has its advantages, the measure is not recommended for group-level evaluations.","PeriodicalId":90945,"journal":{"name":"Physical medicine and rehabilitation international","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Construct Validity and Validity to Change of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in Patients with Shoulder and Low Back Pain: A Clinimetric Study\",\"authors\":\"Kromer To, J. Saner, Sieben Jm, Bastiaenen Chg\",\"doi\":\"10.26420/physmedrehabilint.2021.1181\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Patient-specific and condition-specific measures are widely used in clinical practice and research to measure disability or change over time. While condition-specific outcome measures comprise a range of restrictions generally relevant for all patients, the Patient-Specific Functional Scale measures restrictions chosen by the individual patient. Objectives: Based on the hypothesis that patient-specific and conditionspecific scales deliver comparable results when used on group level. The aim of this study was to test for floor and ceiling effects, to evaluate construct validity and validity to change of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale when compared to condition-specific outcome measures. For this purpose, two datasets from patients with shoulder pain and low back pain were analyzed. Methods: Patient-Specific Functional Scale scores were compared to the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire at 4 time-points using stem-and-leaf-plots and correlations using Pearson’s r. Hypothesis-driven correlation levels for data interpretation were predefined, with r ≥0.75=high, r ≥0.5=moderate, r ≥0.25=low. Results: Patient-Specific Functional Scale floor effects were comparable to condition-specific outcome measures in both samples. At none of the timepoints did the Patient-Specific Functional Scale correlate with the conditionspecific outcome measures in the expected manner. Conclusion: Hypotheses regarding expected ranges of correlation between the Patient-Specific Functional Scale and the condition-specific outcome measures for construct validity and validity to change were not met. While the use of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in a clinical context has its advantages, the measure is not recommended for group-level evaluations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Physical medicine and rehabilitation international\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Physical medicine and rehabilitation international\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26420/physmedrehabilint.2021.1181\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical medicine and rehabilitation international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26420/physmedrehabilint.2021.1181","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在临床实践和研究中,针对患者和特定条件的测量方法被广泛用于测量残疾或随时间的变化。虽然特定条件的结果测量包括一系列通常与所有患者相关的限制,但患者特定功能量表测量由个别患者选择的限制。目的:基于这样一种假设,即当在群体水平上使用时,特定于患者和特定于条件的量表可以提供可比较的结果。本研究的目的是测试下限和上限效应,与特定条件的结果测量相比,评估结构有效性和患者特异性功能量表变化的有效性。为此,分析了肩部疼痛和腰痛患者的两个数据集。方法:将患者特异性功能量表评分与肩部疼痛和残疾指数和Roland Morris残疾问卷在4个时间点进行比较,使用茎叶图和Pearson r进行相关性分析。预先定义了数据解释的假设驱动相关性水平,r≥0.75=高,r≥0.5=中等,r≥0.25=低。结果:在两个样本中,患者特异性功能量表的基底效应与条件特异性结果测量结果相当。在任何一个时间点,患者特异性功能量表都没有以预期的方式与条件特异性结果测量相关联。结论:关于患者特异性功能量表与条件特异性结果测量之间的预期相关性范围的假设,即构念有效性和改变有效性不满足。虽然在临床环境中使用患者特异性功能量表有其优点,但不建议将该量表用于小组级评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Construct Validity and Validity to Change of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in Patients with Shoulder and Low Back Pain: A Clinimetric Study
Background: Patient-specific and condition-specific measures are widely used in clinical practice and research to measure disability or change over time. While condition-specific outcome measures comprise a range of restrictions generally relevant for all patients, the Patient-Specific Functional Scale measures restrictions chosen by the individual patient. Objectives: Based on the hypothesis that patient-specific and conditionspecific scales deliver comparable results when used on group level. The aim of this study was to test for floor and ceiling effects, to evaluate construct validity and validity to change of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale when compared to condition-specific outcome measures. For this purpose, two datasets from patients with shoulder pain and low back pain were analyzed. Methods: Patient-Specific Functional Scale scores were compared to the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire at 4 time-points using stem-and-leaf-plots and correlations using Pearson’s r. Hypothesis-driven correlation levels for data interpretation were predefined, with r ≥0.75=high, r ≥0.5=moderate, r ≥0.25=low. Results: Patient-Specific Functional Scale floor effects were comparable to condition-specific outcome measures in both samples. At none of the timepoints did the Patient-Specific Functional Scale correlate with the conditionspecific outcome measures in the expected manner. Conclusion: Hypotheses regarding expected ranges of correlation between the Patient-Specific Functional Scale and the condition-specific outcome measures for construct validity and validity to change were not met. While the use of the Patient-Specific Functional Scale in a clinical context has its advantages, the measure is not recommended for group-level evaluations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Study of Red Ginseng Preparation HRG80 for Relieving Muscle Pain/Soreness and Supporting the Neuromuscular Performance of Elite Weightlifters in Intense Resistance Exercise: An Open-Label, Randomized, Crossover Trial Decannulation Timing is an Expression of Neurological Recovery Time: The Need to Define a Performance within a Time Frame Vincer EMO Project: Physical Activity for Haemophilic Patients. How We Faced Up SARS COV2 Pandemic Risk Assessment System of Fall in the Elderly Using Artificial Intelligence and Cloud Computing Short Wave Diathermy (SWD) Therapy in Patients with Adhesive Capsulitis of Shoulder
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1