3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Core patient-reported outcome measures for chronic pain patients treated with spinal cord stimulation or dorsal root ganglia stimulation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Neurostimulation is a highly effective therapy for the treatment of chronic Intractable pain, however, due to the complexity of pain, measuring a subject’s long-term response to the therapy remains difficult. Frequent measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to reflect multiple aspects of subjects’ pain is a crucial step in determining therapy outcomes. However, collecting full-length PROs is burdensome for both patients and clinicians. The objective of this work is to identify the reduced set of questions from multiple validated PROs that can accurately characterize chronic pain patients’ responses to neurostimulation therapies.

          Methods

          Validated PROs were used to capture pain, physical function and disability, as well as psychometric, satisfaction, and global health metrics. PROs were collected from 509 patients implanted with Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) or Dorsal Root Ganglia (DRG) neurostimulators enrolled in the prospective, international, post-market REALITY study (NCT03876054, Registration Date: March 15, 2019). A combination of linear regression, Pearson’s correlation, and factor analysis were used to eliminate highly correlated questions and find the minimal meaningful set of questions within the predefined domains of each scale.

          Results

          The shortened versions of the questionnaires presented almost identical accuracy for classifying the therapy outcomes as compared to the validated full-length versions. In addition, principal component analysis was performed on all the PROs and showed a robust clustering of pain intensity, psychological factors, physical function, and sleep across multiple PROs. A selected set of questions captured from multiple PROs can provide adequate information for measuring neurostimulation therapy outcomes.

          Conclusions

          PROs are important subjective measures to evaluate the physiological and psychological aspects of pain. However, these measures are cumbersome to collect. These shorter and more targeted PROs could result in better patient engagement, and enhanced and more frequent data collection processes for digital health platforms that minimize patient burden while increasing therapeutic benefits for chronic pain patients.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12955-023-02158-2.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Statistics corner: A guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research.

          M M Mukaka (2012)
          Correlation is a statistical method used to assess a possible linear association between two continuous variables. It is simple both to calculate and to interpret. However, misuse of correlation is so common among researchers that some statisticians have wished that the method had never been devised at all. The aim of this article is to provide a guide to appropriate use of correlation in medical research and to highlight some misuse. Examples of the applications of the correlation coefficient have been provided using data from statistical simulations as well as real data. Rule of thumb for interpreting size of a correlation coefficient has been provided.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008.

            Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are essential when evaluating many new treatments in health care; yet, current measures have been limited by a lack of precision, standardization, and comparability of scores across studies and diseases. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) provides item banks that offer the potential for efficient (minimizes item number without compromising reliability), flexible (enables optional use of interchangeable items), and precise (has minimal error in estimate) measurement of commonly studied PROs. We report results from the first large-scale testing of PROMIS items. Fourteen item pools were tested in the U.S. general population and clinical groups using an online panel and clinic recruitment. A scale-setting subsample was created reflecting demographics proportional to the 2000 U.S. census. Using item-response theory (graded response model), 11 item banks were calibrated on a sample of 21,133, measuring components of self-reported physical, mental, and social health, along with a 10-item Global Health Scale. Short forms from each bank were developed and compared with the overall bank and with other well-validated and widely accepted ("legacy") measures. All item banks demonstrated good reliability across most of the score distributions. Construct validity was supported by moderate to strong correlations with legacy measures. PROMIS item banks and their short forms provide evidence that they are reliable and precise measures of generic symptoms and functional reports comparable to legacy instruments. Further testing will continue to validate and test PROMIS items and banks in diverse clinical populations. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The Oswestry Disability Index.

              The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) has become one of the principal condition-specific outcome measures used in the management of spinal disorders. This review is based on publications using the ODI identified from the authors' personal databases, the Science Citation Index, and hand searches of Spine and current textbooks of spinal disorders. To review the versions of this instrument, document methods by which it has been validated, collate data from scores found in normal and back pain populations, provide curves for power calculations in studies using the ODI, and maintain the ODI as a gold standard outcome measure. It has now been 20 years since its original publication. More than 200 citations exist in the Science Citation Index. The authors have a large correspondence file relating to the ODI, that is cited in most of the large textbooks related to spinal disorders. All the published versions of the questionnaire were identified. A systematic review of this literature was made. The various reports of validation were collated and related to a version. Four versions of the ODI are available in English and nine in other languages. Some published versions contain misprints, and many omit the scoring system. At least 114 studies contain usable data. These data provide both validation and standards for other users and indicate the power of the instrument for detecting change in sample populations. The ODI remains a valid and vigorous measure and has been a worthwhile outcome measure. The process of using the ODI is reviewed and should be the subject of further research. The receiver operating characteristics should be explored in a population with higher self-report disabilities. The behavior of the instrument is incompletely understood, particularly in sensitivity to real change.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                f.huygen@erasmusmc.nl
                Journal
                Health Qual Life Outcomes
                Health Qual Life Outcomes
                Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
                BioMed Central (London )
                1477-7525
                20 July 2023
                20 July 2023
                2023
                : 21
                : 77
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.5645.2, ISNI 000000040459992X, Erasmus University Medical Center, ; Dr. Molewaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, Postbus 2040, 3000 Rotterdam, CA Netherlands
                [2 ]GRID grid.66875.3a, ISNI 0000 0004 0459 167X, Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, , Mayo Clinic, ; Rochester, MN USA
                [3 ]Neurosurgical Associates of Lancaster, Lancaster, PA USA
                [4 ]Nura Pain Clinic, Minneapolis, MN USA
                [5 ]GRID grid.411327.2, ISNI 0000 0001 2176 9917, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, ; Düsseldorf, Germany
                [6 ]Spinal Diagnostics, Tualatin, OR USA
                [7 ]Nevada Advanced Pain, Reno, NV USA
                [8 ]Abbott Neuromodulation, Austin, TX USA
                [9 ]GRID grid.415930.a, Rijnstate Hospital, ; Arnhem, Netherlands
                Article
                2158
                10.1186/s12955-023-02158-2
                10357671
                0f0544e5-0334-4bc4-9721-62772f822f27
                © The Author(s) 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 17 March 2023
                : 29 June 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100001316, Abbott Laboratories;
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

                Health & Social care
                chronic pain therapy,spinal cord stimulation,patient-reported outcomes,digital health,confirmatory factor analysis,dimensionality reduction,questionnaire burden

                Comments

                Comment on this article