[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The Japanese Orthopaedic Association decided to revise the JOA score for low back pain and to develop a new outcome measure. In February 2002, the first survey was performed with a preliminary questionnaire consisting of 60 evaluation items. Based on findings of that survey, 25 items were selected for a draft of the JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ). The second survey was performed to confirm the reliability of the draft questionnaire. This article further evaluates the validity of this questionnaire and establishes a measurement scale.
The subjects of this study consisted of 355 patients with low back disorders of any type (201 men, 154 women; mean age 50.7 years). Each patient was asked to fill in a self-administered questionnaire. Superficial validity was checked in terms of the completion rate for filling out the entire questionnaire. Factor analysis was then performed to evaluate the validity of the questionnaire and establish a measurement scale.
As a result of the factor analysis, 25 items were categorized into five factors. The factors were named based on the commonality of the items: social function, mental health, lumbar function, walking ability, and low back pain. To establish a measurement scale for each factor, we determined the coefficient for each item so the difference between the maximum factor scores and minimum factor scores was approximately 100. We adjusted the formula so the maximum for each factor score was 100 and the minimum was 0.
We confirmed the validity of the JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire and established a measurement scale.
Full-text · Article · Jun 2008 · Journal of Orthopaedic Science
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: To establish a patient-oriented outcome measure for cervical myelopathy, a subcommittee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) developed a new scoring system to evaluate the overall clinical status of patients, which could be completed by patients themselves. The subcommittee completed three large-scale studies to select and modify questions derived from various preexisting outcome measures including Short Form-36, and then finalized and validated the questionnaire, which comprised 24 questions.
The finalized questionnaire was administered to 369 patients with cervical myelopathy due to disc herniation, spondylosis, or ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament by randomly selected board-certified spine surgeons. Patients with different severities of myelopathy were included to insure accuracy and responsiveness of this questionnaire against patients' different neurological status.
Data of 236 patients were employed and were subjected to rigorous statistical analyses. There was no question that was difficult to answer and distribution of answers for each question was not concentrated to one choice, indicating the appropriateness of all 24 questions. Results of factor analysis suggested that the 24 questions could be divided into five different factors or functional domains. The factors were defined as follows: factor 1, lower extremity function; factor 2, quality of life; factor 3, cervical spine function; factor 4, bladder function; and factor 5, upper extremity function. Finally, equations that would yield scores for the five factors were assembled. The score to be used to represent the degree of patients' disability or status in each domain can be calculated by multiplying prefixed numbers of selected answers to questions by preassigned coefficients. Coefficients were defined to make the minimum score 0 and the maximum score 100.
We have successfully established a questionnaire that is able to demonstrate the status of patients suffering cervical myelopathy from five different aspects represented by five intuitive numerical scores. The final issue to be confirmed is the responsiveness of this questionnaire to changes in patients' status after various surgical and nonsurgical treatments.
Full-text · Article · Feb 2008 · Journal of Orthopaedic Science
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The project to develop a new Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score rating system for low back disorders, the JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), is currently in progress. Part 1 of the study selected 25 "candidate" items for use on the JOABPEQ. The purpose of this current Part 2 of the study was to verify the reliability of the questionnaire.
A total of 161 patients with low-back disorders of any type participated in the study. Each patient was interviewed twice at an interval of 2 weeks using the same questionnaire. The reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated by determining the extension of the kappa and weighted kappa coefficients.
Both kappa and weighted kappa were more than 0.50 for all but one item, which was 0.48. The lower 95% confidence interval exceeded 0.4 in all but two items, which was 0.39. This implied that the test-retest reliability of JOABPEQ was acceptable as a measure of outcome.
The tentative questionnaire of the JOABPEQ with 25 items was confirmed to be reliable enough to describe the quality of life of patients who suffer low back disorders.
Full-text · Article · Dec 2007 · Journal of Orthopaedic Science
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: There is no widely accepted objective evaluation for lumbar spine disorders. New outcome measures should be patient-oriented and should measure symptoms and self-reported functional status in multiple dimensions. The aim of this study was to identify items to be included in the disease-specific quality of life (QOL) questionnaire for the assessments of patients with lumbar spine disorders.
The draft of the QOL questionnaire that consisted of a total of 60 items, including 24 items derived from the Japanese version of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) and 36 items derived from the Japanese version of Short Form 36 (SF-36), were administered to patients and controls. After obtaining written informed consent, the following data were collected from the patient group (n = 328) and the control group (n = 213): (1) background characteristics, including age, diagnosis, Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and finger to floor distance; (2) responses to the questionnaire; (3) the identification rate by discrimination analysis to select the candidates for adoption and by adopting explanatory variables. The items to be excluded were determined by examining the explanatory variables, which were selected after the discrimination analysis, by setting the candidate to-be-excluded items as an objective variable.
Based on the distribution of the responses, two items, RDQ-15 and RDQ-19, were excluded. From the results of the correlation coefficient calculation for each question in the patient group, 33 items were excluded and 27 candidate items were adopted. Based on the adoption explanatory variable used in the discrimination analysis, 25 of the 27 candidate items for adoption were accepted.
This study identified the 25 specific questionnaire items that should be included in the questionnaire to evaluate QOL of patients with various lumbar spine disorders.
Full-text · Article · Oct 2007 · Journal of Orthopaedic Science
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The manner of measuring the outcome of cervical myelopathy must be patient-oriented and have sufficient reliability and validity. The current Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scoring system for cervical myelopathy is widely used but has not met this requirement. The first- and second-round surveys established 24 items for inclusion on a new questionnaire for cervical myelopathy. The purpose of this study (the third-round survey A) was to confirm the reproducibility of patient responses to the selected questions.
A total of 201 patients with cervical myelopathy and with no change of symptoms between the two interviews were included. Each patient was interviewed twice using the same questionnaire at an interval of 4 weeks. The reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated by determining the extension of the weighted kappa coefficients.
The weighted kappa coefficient for each item was >0.4, confirming that the test-retest reliability was acceptable.
The newly developed JOA Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire was proven to have sufficient reliability.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: A new self-administered questionnaire as an outcome measure for patients with cervical myelopathy was drawn up in Part 1 (Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire, JOACMEQ). Because a question with regard to driving a car (C-41) was not suitable for this patient group, the authors composed an alternative question related to neck motion (C-41-2). The purposes of the present study were to perform a secondary survey on patients with cervical myelopathy and to statistically analyze the responses to validate the JOACMEQ, and also to determine if it was possible to convert item C-41 to the alternative question.
A member of the Subcommittee on Low Back Pain and Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation from each hospital administered the questionnaire to more than 50 patients with cervical myelopathy in each hospital. The questionnaire consisted of 25 questions, 24 of which were extracted in the primary survey. The authors statistically examined whether it was possible to convert question C-41 to C-41-2.
Three hundred and sixty-eight patients with cervical myelopathy were enrolled in the present study. No questions elicited no answer or "I am not sure" in more than 5% of patients except question C-41. There were no questions that the patients answered with difficulty. There was no tendency that was concentrated on one option as an answer to questions. There was a high correlation between questions C-41 and C-41-2. Spearman's correlation coefficient and kappa value showed that there was high coincidence between the two questions C-41 and C-41-2. It is possible to convert the question C-41 to the alternative question C41-2.
The questionnaire has sufficient reliability for clinical use. It is possible that the JOACMEQ will prevail and become a global standard to evaluate outcomes in patients with cervical myelopathy.
Full-text · Article · Jun 2007 · Journal of Orthopaedic Science
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: An outcome measure to evaluate the neurological function of cervical myelopathy was proposed by the Japanese Orthopaedic Association in 1975 (JOA score), and has been widely used in Japan. However, the JOA score does not include patients' satisfaction, disability, handicaps, or general health, which can be affected by cervical myelopathy. The purpose of this study was to develop a new outcome measure for patients with cervical myelopathy.
This study was conducted in eight university hospitals and their affiliated hospitals from February to May 2002. The questionnaire included 77 items. Forty-one questions, which were originally listed by the authors, were for evaluation of the physical function of the cervical spine and spinal cord. The Medical Outcome Study Short-Form 36-Item Health Survey (SF-36) was used to examine health-related quality of life (QOL). Patients with cervical myelopathy and healthy volunteers were recruited at each institution. After analysis of the answers from patients and volunteers, irrelevant questions using the following criteria were excluded: (1) a question 80% of answers for which were concentrated on one choice, (2) a question whose answer was highly correlated with that of other questions, (3) a question that could be explained by other questions, and (4) a question for which the distribution of the answers obtained from the patients was not different from that obtained from the normal volunteers.
The patients comprised 164 men and 86 women, and the healthy volunteers 96 men and 120 women. Thirteen items from the questions about the physical functions of the cervical spine and the spinal cord and 11 items from SF-36 remained as candidates that should be included in the final outcome measure questionnaire.
Twenty-four questions remained as candidates for the final questionnaire. This new self-administered questionnaire might be used to evaluate the outcomes in patients with cervical myelopathy more efficiently.
Full-text · Article · Jun 2007 · Journal of Orthopaedic Science