Objective. To identify, describe, and evaluate common outcome measures in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP).
Summary of Background Data. The treatment of CLBP has been associated with multiple clinical challenges. Further complicating this is the myriad of outcome scores used to assess treatment of CLBP. These scores have been used to examine different domains of patient satisfaction and quality of life in the literature. Critical assessment of the frequency, parity, and the quality of these outcomes are essential to improve our understanding of CLBP.
Methods. A systematic review of the English-language literature was undertaken for articles published from January 2001 through December
MK-8931 Neuronal Signaling inhibitor 31, 2010. Electronic databases and reference lists of key articles were searched to identify measures check details used to evaluate outcomes in six different domains in patients with CLBP. The titles and abstracts of the peer-reviewed literature of LBP were searched to determine which of these measures were most commonly reported in the literature and which have been validated in populations with CLBP.
Results. We identified 75 outcome measures cited to evaluate CLBP. Twenty-nine of these outcome
measures were excluded because of only a single citation leaving 46 measures for the evaluation. The most commonly used functional outcomes were the Oswestry Disability Index, Roland Morris Disability Index, and range of motion. For pain, the Numeric Pain Rating Scale, Brief Pain Inventory, Pain Disability Index, McGill Pain Questionnaire, and visual analog scale were most commonly cited. For psychosocial function, the Fear Avoidance
Beliefs Questionnaire, Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, and Beck Depression Inventory were most commonly used. For generic quality of life, short form 36, Nottingham Health Profile, short form Epoxomicin molecular weight 12, and Sickness Impact Profile were the most common measures. For objective measures, the work status/return to work, complications or adverse events, and medications used were the most commonly cited. For preference-based measures, the Euro-Quol 5 dimensions and short form 6 dimensions were most commonly cited. The validity, reliability, responsiveness, universality, and potential proprietary requirements are summarized for each.
Conclusion. Outcome measures should be routinely assessed in patients with CLBP. The choice of appropriate outcome measure should be influenced by the study objectives and design, as well as properties of the particular measure within the context of CLBP.
Clinical Recommendations. Recommendation 1: When selecting the appropriate outcome measures for clinical or research purposes, consider domains that best measure what are most important to patients. Measures that are valid, reliable, and responsive to change should be considered first.