Body image in idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison study of psychometric properties between four patient-reported outcome instruments

Antonia Matamalas, Joan Bagó, Elisabetta D'Agata, Ferran Pellisé, Antonia Matamalas, Joan Bagó, Elisabetta D'Agata, Ferran Pellisé

Abstract

Background: Four patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments are commonly used to assess body image in idiopathic scoliosis (IS): the Quality of Life Profile for Spinal Deformities (QLPSD), SRS-22 Self-Image scale, Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ), and Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS). The aim of this study is to compare the psychometric properties of these instruments in patients with IS and report the translational/cultural adaptation of the SAQ to Spanish.

Methods: The four instruments in a Spanish version were administered to 80 patients with IS aged 10 to 40 years old. The sample was stratified according to scoliosis magnitude (less and more than 45º). Analysis was also conducted for age groups. The psychometric properties studied included convergent and divergent construct validity, as well as internal consistency. Convergent validity was evaluated by correlation analysis between the self-image instruments and Cobb angle. Divergent validity was assessed with correlation analysis between PRO scores and SRS-22 dimensions scores such as Function, Pain and Mental Health.

Results: In the overall sample, each of the PRO instruments demonstrated high internal consistency (QLPSD Body Image, α = 0.80; SRS-22 Self Image, α = 0.78; SAQ, α = 0.89; TAPS, α = 0.87), also both for younger and adult patients subgroups. Correlation with curve magnitude was significant for each of the four scales. However, the correlation was higher for the pictorial scales (SAQ Appearance r = 0.61, TAPS r = -0.62) than for the textual scales (QLPSD-bi r = 0.36, SRS-22 Self-Image scale r = -0.41). In the younger group, correlation between Cobb angle and textual scales (QLPSD-bi and SRS-22 Self-Image Scale) was not significant. Body Image scales showed significant correlations with SRS-22 Pain, Function and Mental Health dimensions.

Conclusions: All four instruments tested have good psychometric properties. Pictorial scales (SAQ Appearance and TAPS) correlated better with the radiological magnitude of the curve and this correlation is independent of age. Unexpectedly, all four scales demonstrated significant correlations with non-body image dimensions and the divergent hypothesis was not confirmed. Globally, pictorial scales showed slightly better construct validity to test body image perception than textual scales.

References

    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Out. 2006;4(1):79.
    1. Tones M, Moss N, Polly DW Jr. A review of quality of life and psychosocial issues in scoliosis. Spine. 2006;31(26):3027–3038. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000249555.87601.fc.
    1. Climent JM, Reig A, Sanchez J, Roda C. Construction and validation of a specific quality of life instrument for adolescents with spine deformities. Spine. 1995;20:2006–2011. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199509150-00011.
    1. Asher MA, Lai SM, Burton D, Manna B. The reliability and concurrent validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 2003;28:63–69. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200301010-00015.
    1. Asher MA, Lai SM, Burton D, Manna B. Scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire: responsiveness to change associated with surgical treatment. Spine. 2003;28:70–73. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200301010-00016.
    1. Asher MA, Lai SM, Burton D, Manna B. Discrimination validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire: relationship to idiopathic scoliosis curve pattern and curve size. Spine. 2003;28:74–78. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200301010-00017.
    1. Sanders JO, Harrast JJ, Kuklo TR, Polly DW, Bridwell KH, Diab M, Dormans JP, Drummond DS, Emans JB, Johnston CE 2nd, Lenke LG, McCarthy RE, Newton PO, Richards BS, Sucato DJ. Spinal Deformity Study Group. The spinal appearance questionnaire: results of reliability, validity, and responsiveness testing in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 2007;32(24):2719–2722. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815a5959.
    1. Carreon LY, Sanders JO, Polly DW, Sucato DJ, Parent S, Roy-Beaudry M, Hopkins J, McClung A, Bratcher KR, Diamond BE. Spinal Deformity Study Group. Spinal appearance questionnaire: factor analysis, scoring, reliability, and validity testing. Spine. 2011;36(18):E1240–E1244. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318204f987.
    1. Carreon LY, Sanders JO, Diab M, Polly D, Diamond BE, Sucato DJ. Discriminative properties of the spinal appearance questionnaire compared with the scoliosis research society-22 revised. Spine Deform. 2013;1(5):328–338. doi: 10.1016/j.jspd.2013.06.001.
    1. Bago J, Sanchez-Raya J, Perez-Grueso FJS, Climent JM. The trunk appearance perception scale (TAPS): A new tool to evaluate subjective impression of trunk deformity in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Scoliosis. 2010;5:6. doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-5-6.
    1. Sanders JO, Polly DW, Cats-Baril W, Jones J, Lenke LG, O’Brien MF, Stephens Richards B, Sucato DJ. AIS Section of the Spinal Deformity Study Group. Analysis of patient and parent assessment of deformity in idiopathic scoliosis using the Walter Reed Visual Assessment Scale. Spine. 2003;28(18):2158–2163. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000084629.97042.0B.
    1. Scoliosis Research Society. Adolescents. Non-Operative Treatments. [ ]
    1. Bago J, Climent JM, Ey A, Perez-Grueso FJ, Izquierdo E. The Spanish version of the srs-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis: transcultural adaptation and reliability analysis. Spine. 2004;29:1676–1680. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000132306.53942.10.
    1. Beaton D, Bomardier C, Guillemin F, Bosi-Ferraz M. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25:3186–3191. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.
    1. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46:1417–1432. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-N.
    1. Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int J Med Educ. 2011;2:53–55.
    1. Berliner JL, Verma K, Lonner BS, Penn PU, Bharucha NJ. Discriminative validity of the scoliosis research society 22 questionnaire among five curve-severity subgroups of adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine J. 2013;13:127–133. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2012.10.025.
    1. Parent EC, Dang R, Hill D, Mahood J, Moreau M, Raso J, Lou E. Score distribution of the scoliosis research society-22 questionnaire in subgroups of patients of all ages with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 2010;35:568–577. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b9c9c0.
    1. Climent JM, Bago J, Ey A, Perez-Grueso FJS, Izquierdo E. Validity of the Spanish version of the scoliosis research society-22 (srs-22) patient questionnaire. Spine. 2005;30(6):705–709. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000155408.76606.8f.
    1. Zywiel MG, Mahomed A, Gandhi R, Perruccio AV, Mahomed NN. Measuring expectations in orthopedic surgery: A systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013. Epub ahead of print. doi:10.1007/s11999-013-3013-8.
    1. Mannion AF, Junge A, Elfering A, Dvorak J, Porchet F, Grob D. Spine. 2009. pp. 1590–1599.
    1. Bridwell KH, Shufflebarger HL, Lenke LG, Lowe TG, Betz RR, Bassett GS. Parents’ and patients’ preferences and concerns in idiopathic adolescent scoliosis: A cross-sectional preoperative analysis. Spine. 2000;25(18):2392–2399. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200009150-00020.
    1. Mulcahey MJ, Chafetz RS, Santangelo AM, Costello K, Merenda LA, Calhoun C, Samdani AF, Betz RR. Cognitive testing of the spinal appearance questionnaire with typically developing youth and youth with idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop. 2011;31(6):661–667.
    1. Parent EC, Wong D, Hill D, Mahood J, Moreau M, Raso J, Lou E. The association between scoliosis research society-22 scores and scoliosis severity changes at a clinically relevant threshold. Spine. 2010;35:315–322. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181cabe75.
    1. Bridwell KH, Berven S, Glassman S, Hamill C, Horton WC, Lenke LG, Schwab F, Baldus C, Shainline M. Is the SRS-22 instrument responsive to change in adult scoliosis patients having primary spinal deformity surgery? Spine. 2007;32:2220–2225. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31814cf120.
    1. Bagó J, Pérez-Grueso FJS, Les E, Hernández P, Pellisé F. Minimal important differences of the SRS-22 patient questionnaire following surgical treatment of idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2009;18:1898–1904. doi: 10.1007/s00586-009-1066-x.
    1. Yang JH, Amit WB, Niraj SK, Seung WS, Jae YH, Hitesh NM, Jin HH. Isolated percutaneous thoracoplasty procedure for skeletally mature adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients, with rib deformity as their only concern: Short-term outcomes. Spine. 2013;38(1):37–43. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182784cdc.
    1. Howard A, Donaldson S, Hedden D, Stephens D, Alman B, Wright J. Improvement in quality of life following surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 2007;32:2715–2718. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815a51cd.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa