The quality of spine surgery from the patient’s perspective. Part 1: The Core Outcome Measures Index in clinical practice

被引:0
作者
Anne F. Mannion
F. Porchet
F. S. Kleinstück
F. Lattig
D. Jeszenszky
V. Bartanusz
J. Dvorak
D. Grob
机构
[1] Schulthess Klinik,Spine Center Division, Department of Research and Development
[2] Schulthess Klinik,Spine Center
来源
European Spine Journal | 2009年 / 18卷
关键词
COMI; Outcome; Spine surgery; Clinical practice;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) is a short, multidimensional outcome instrument, with excellent psychometric properties, that has been recommended for use in monitoring the outcome of spinal surgery from the patient’s perspective. This study examined the feasibility of implementation of COMI and its performance in clinical practice within a large Spine Centre. Beginning in March 2004, all patients undergoing spine surgery in our Spine Centre (1,000–1,200 patients/year) were asked to complete the COMI before and 3, 12 and 24 months after surgery. The COMI has one question each on back (neck) pain intensity, leg/buttock (arm/shoulder) pain intensity, function, symptom-specific well being, general quality of life, work disability and social disability, scored as a 0–10 index. At follow-up, patients also rated the global effectiveness of surgery, and their satisfaction with their treatment in the hospital, on a five-point Likert scale. After some fine-tuning of the method of administration, completion rates for the pre-op COMI improved from 78% in the first year of operation to 92% in subsequent years (non-response was mainly due to emergencies or language or age issues). Effective completion rates at 3, 12 and 24-month follow-up were 94, 92 and 88%, respectively. The 12-month global outcomes (from N = 3,056 patients) were operation helped a lot, 1,417 (46.4%); helped, 860 (28.1%); helped only little, 454 (14.9%); did not help, 272 (8.9%); made things worse, 53 (1.7%). The mean reductions in COMI score for each of these categories were 5.4 (SD2.5); 3.1 (SD2.2); 1.3 (SD1.7); 0.5 (SD2.2) and −0.7 (SD2.2), respectively, yielding respective standardised response mean values (“effect sizes”) for each outcome category of 2.2, 1.4, 0.8, 0.2 and 0.3, respectively. The questionnaire was feasible to implement on a prospective basis in routine practice, and was as responsive as many longer spine outcome questionnaires. The shortness of the COMI and its multidimensional nature make it an attractive option to comprehensively assess all patients within a given Spine Centre and hence avoid selection bias in reporting outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:367 / 373
页数:6
相关论文
共 85 条
  • [1] Amundsen T(2000)Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management?: a prospective 10-year study Spine 25 1424-1435
  • [2] Weber H(2007)Clinical update: low back pain Lancet 369 726-728
  • [3] Nordal HJ(1996)Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments Pain 65 71-76
  • [4] Magnaes B(2000)Outcome assessments in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders: summary and general recommendations Spine 25 3100-3103
  • [5] Abdelnoor M(2003)Is patient satisfaction a legitimate outcome of pain management? J Pain Symptom Manage 25 264-275
  • [6] Lilleas F(1998)Outcome measures for low back pain research. A proposal for standardized use Spine 23 2003-2013
  • [7] Balague F(2006)Validation of a minimum outcome core set in the evaluation of patients with back pain Spine 31 1372-1379
  • [8] Mannion AF(2005)Distinguishing patient satisfaction with treatment delivery from treatment effect: a preliminary investigation of patient satisfaction with symptoms after physical therapy treatment of low back pain Arch Phys Med Rehabil 86 1338-1344
  • [9] Pellise F(2003)Does the outcome 2 months after lumbar disc surgery predict the outcome 12 months later? Disabil Rehabil 25 968-972
  • [10] Cedraschi C(2006)Predictors of surgical outcome and their assessment Eur Spine J 15 S93-S108