Guest guest Posted November 18, 2004 Report Share Posted November 18, 2004 Do you have a copy of the Patient's Global form and the Bournemath one? Sunny Sunny Kierstyn, RN DC Fibromyalgia Care Center of Oregon 59 Santa Clara St., Eugene, Oregon, 97404 541-689-0935 >From: " Vern Saboe DC " <vas@...> ><Oregondcs > >Subject: Fw: Neck OATS >Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 06:37:16 -0800 > > >F.Y.I., and relative to the proposed Administrative Rule we have been >talking about. > >Vern Saboe, DC > Neck OATS > > > > Sensitivity and Specificity of Outcome Measures in Patients with Neck > > Pain: Detecting Clinically Significant Improvement > > > > Study Design: Prospective, single-cohort study. > > > > Objective: To determine the relative sensitivity of a range of > > outcome measures used in evaluating treatment interventions in > > patients with neck pain and the magnitude of change scores on the > > neck Bournemouth Questionnaire and the cutoff score on the Patients' > > Global Impression of Change scale associated with clinically > > significant improvement. > > > > Summary of Background Data: Traditionally, evaluation of treatment > > interventions using subjective outcome measures has been based on the > > statistical significance of the difference between group mean values. > > To be clinically meaningful, however, information is required from > > sensitive outcome measures on the proportion of patients undergoing a > > clinically important improvement and from this, the number needed to > > treat for a single patient to benefit. > > > > Methods: Patients with nonspecific neck pain from a number of > > treatment centers completed a battery of self-report questionnaires, > > including the Bournemouth Questionnaire, before and after > > chiropractic treatment. After treatment, patients also completed a > > retrospective analysis of their overall improvement since the start > > of treatment (Patients' Global Impression of Change). The a priori > > definition of clinically significant improvement was defined as a > > Reliable Change Index on the Bournemouth Questionnaire of >1.96. > > > > Results: The best cutoffs with a balance between the highest > > sensitivity and highest specificity in detecting clinical improvement > > were a score of 2 or less on the Patients' Global Impression of > > Change (11-point Numerical Rating Scale: 0 = much better, 5 = no > > change, and 10 = much worse) and a raw change score of three or more > > points on each of the seven 11-point Numerical Rating Scale subscales > > of the Bournemouth Questionnaire. For the total score of the > > Bournemouth Questionnaire, raw change scores of 13 or more points, > > percentage change scores of 36% or more, and individual effect sizes > > of 1.0 or more were all associated with clinically significant > > improvement. The sensitivity of the Bournemouth Questionnaire in > > terms of its effect size was comparable with that of pain intensity > > scales and the Neck Disability Index. > > > > Conclusions: The present findings will assist in the choice of > > outcome measures in trials on neck pain. The study also illustrates a > > methodologic framework for interpreting change scores in terms of > > clinical improvement, facilitating the process of making sense of > > research data in the clinical setting. > > > > Bolton JE. Spine. November 1, 2004; Vol. 29, No. 21, pp. 2410-2417. > > > > -- > > > > > > Warren T. Jahn, DC, MPS, FACO, DACBSP, DABFP > > Board Certified Chiropractic Orthopedist and Sports Physician > > Forensic Examiner > > > > Roswell GA 30076 > > 770-740-1999 > > 770-619-3203 fax > > > > " I have always strenuously supported the right of every man to his own > > opinion, > > however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies another > > this right > > makes a slave of himself to his present opinion, because he precludes > > himself the right > > of changing it. " -- Paine, 1783 > > > > > > For information on the College on Forensic Sciences (CFS) go to > > http://www.forensic-sciences.org or call 770-740-1999 > > > > This message, together with any attachments, is intended only for the >use > > of the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain information >that > > is legally privileged, confidential, and exempted from disclosure. If >you > > are > > not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, > > disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message, or > > any attachment, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this >message > > in error, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or >by > > return e-mail, then delete the > > message. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >OregonDCs rules: >1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to >foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve >members will be tolerated. >2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name. >3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere. However, >it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward, or >otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without his >or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 18, 2004 Report Share Posted November 18, 2004 No, I don't nor do I know how to score it....yet! Vern Saboe Neck OATS >> >> >> > Sensitivity and Specificity of Outcome Measures in Patients with Neck >> > Pain: Detecting Clinically Significant Improvement >> > >> > Study Design: Prospective, single-cohort study. >> > >> > Objective: To determine the relative sensitivity of a range of >> > outcome measures used in evaluating treatment interventions in >> > patients with neck pain and the magnitude of change scores on the >> > neck Bournemouth Questionnaire and the cutoff score on the Patients' >> > Global Impression of Change scale associated with clinically >> > significant improvement. >> > >> > Summary of Background Data: Traditionally, evaluation of treatment >> > interventions using subjective outcome measures has been based on the >> > statistical significance of the difference between group mean values. >> > To be clinically meaningful, however, information is required from >> > sensitive outcome measures on the proportion of patients undergoing a >> > clinically important improvement and from this, the number needed to >> > treat for a single patient to benefit. >> > >> > Methods: Patients with nonspecific neck pain from a number of >> > treatment centers completed a battery of self-report questionnaires, >> > including the Bournemouth Questionnaire, before and after >> > chiropractic treatment. After treatment, patients also completed a >> > retrospective analysis of their overall improvement since the start >> > of treatment (Patients' Global Impression of Change). The a priori >> > definition of clinically significant improvement was defined as a >> > Reliable Change Index on the Bournemouth Questionnaire of >1.96. >> > >> > Results: The best cutoffs with a balance between the highest >> > sensitivity and highest specificity in detecting clinical improvement >> > were a score of 2 or less on the Patients' Global Impression of >> > Change (11-point Numerical Rating Scale: 0 = much better, 5 = no >> > change, and 10 = much worse) and a raw change score of three or more >> > points on each of the seven 11-point Numerical Rating Scale subscales >> > of the Bournemouth Questionnaire. For the total score of the >> > Bournemouth Questionnaire, raw change scores of 13 or more points, >> > percentage change scores of 36% or more, and individual effect sizes >> > of 1.0 or more were all associated with clinically significant >> > improvement. The sensitivity of the Bournemouth Questionnaire in >> > terms of its effect size was comparable with that of pain intensity >> > scales and the Neck Disability Index. >> > >> > Conclusions: The present findings will assist in the choice of >> > outcome measures in trials on neck pain. The study also illustrates a >> > methodologic framework for interpreting change scores in terms of >> > clinical improvement, facilitating the process of making sense of >> > research data in the clinical setting. >> > >> > Bolton JE. Spine. November 1, 2004; Vol. 29, No. 21, pp. 2410-2417. >> > >> > -- >> > >> > >> > Warren T. Jahn, DC, MPS, FACO, DACBSP, DABFP >> > Board Certified Chiropractic Orthopedist and Sports Physician >> > Forensic Examiner >> > >> > Roswell GA 30076 >> > 770-740-1999 >> > 770-619-3203 fax >> > >> > " I have always strenuously supported the right of every man to his own >> > opinion, >> > however different that opinion might be to mine. He who denies another >> > this right >> > makes a slave of himself to his present opinion, because he precludes >> > himself the right >> > of changing it. " -- Paine, 1783 >> > >> > >> > For information on the College on Forensic Sciences (CFS) go to >> > http://www.forensic-sciences.org or call 770-740-1999 >> > >> > This message, together with any attachments, is intended only for the >>use >> > of the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain information >>that >> > is legally privileged, confidential, and exempted from disclosure. If >>you >> > are >> > not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, >> > disclosure, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message, or >> > any attachment, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this >>message >> > in error, please notify the original sender immediately by telephone or >>by >> > return e-mail, then delete the >> > message. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >>OregonDCs rules: >>1. Keep correspondence professional; the purpose of the listserve is to >>foster communication and collegiality. No personal attacks on listserve >>members will be tolerated. >>2. Always sign your e-mails with your first and last name. >>3. The listserve is not secure; your e-mail could end up anywhere. >>However, it is against the rules of the listserve to copy, print, forward, >>or otherwise distribute correspondence written by another member without >>his or her consent, unless all personal identifiers have been removed. >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.