Creation and Validation of the Select Medical Patient Reported Experience Measure for Physical and Occupational Therapy Outpatient Clinics.

OBJECTIVE: This study describes the creation and examination of the internal consistency, content validity, construct/structural validity, and criterion/concurrent validity of the Select Medical Patient Reported Experience Measure (SM-PREM). DESIGN: Observational study design. SETTING: 1054 Outpatient physical and occupational therapy locations in North America. PARTICIPANTS: The study included 89,205 patients with various musculoskeletal disorders (N=89,205). INTERVENTION: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Content validity was described, and internal consistency, construct/structural validity (factor analysis), and criterion/concurrent validity were analyzed, with concurrent validity compared against patient reported outcomes (PROM), the Net Promoter Scale, and the Orebro Musculoskeletal Screening Questionnaire-12. RESULTS: Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the SM-PREM yielded 3 dimensions, each with a very strong internal consistency (>.850). The SM-PREM yielded statistically significant results in all areas, with values that reflected minimal to fair association with PROMs. CONCLUSION: The SM-PREM appears to capture a unique construct compared to PROMs. The 11-item tool has 3 definitive dimensions and exhibits strong internal consistency. The tool may be useful in examining patient experience in patients with musculoskeletal injuries seen by physical and occupational therapists.

Systematic review of diagnostic accuracy of patient history, clinical findings, and physical tests in the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis.

PURPOSE: To update evidence of diagnostic potential for identification of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) based on demographic and patient history, clinical findings, and physical tests, and report posttest probabilities associated with test findings. METHODS: An electronic search of PubMed, CINAHL and Embase was conducted combining terms related to low back pain, stenosis and diagnostic accuracy. Prospective or retrospective studies investigating diagnostic accuracy of LSS using patient history, clinical findings and/or physical tests were included. The risk of bias and applicability were assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS 2) tool. Diagnostic accuracy including sensitivities (SN), specificities (SP), likelihood ratios (+LR and -LR) and posttest probabilities (+PTP and -PTP) with 95% confidence intervals were summarized. RESULTS: Nine studies were included (pooled n = 36,228 participants) investigating 49 different index tests (30 demographic and patient history and 19 clinical findings/physical tests). Of the nine studies included, only two exhibited a low risk of bias and seven exhibited good applicability according to QUADAS 2. The demographic and patient history measures (self-reported history questionnaire, no pain when seated, numbness of perineal region) and the clinical findings/physical tests (two-stage treadmill test, symptoms after a March test and abnormal Romberg test) highly improved positive posttest probability by > 25% to diagnose LSS. CONCLUSION: Outside of one study that was able to completely rule out LSS with no functional neurological changes none of the stand-alone findings were strong enough to rule in or rule out LSS. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Classification of older adults who underwent lumbar-related surgery using pre-operative biopsychosocial predictors and relationships with surgical recovery: An observational study conducted in the United States.

Lumbar surgery is a commonly prescribed intervention for low back pain but poses higher risks and worse outcomes for older adults. Identifying clinical phenotypes based on biopsychosocial factors may help identify older adults who are at greatest risk for poor postoperative recovery. This study aimed to (a) classify older adults who underwent lumbar surgery based on preoperative biopsychosocial factors, and (b) quantify the association between preoperative biopsychosocial classifications and 3 and 12 months postoperative improvement outcomes. Latent class analysis was used to identify biopsychosocial classifications in 10,283 individuals aged ≥60 from the Quality Outcomes Database (the United States, 2021-2018). Logistic regression models measured the association between biopsychosocial classifications and 3 and 12 months postoperative outcomes (back/leg pain intensity, disability and quality of life), adjusting for covariates. Three classes were identified based on 19 a priori biopsychosocial factors and were characterised as 'high-risk' (15%), 'physical-/social health-risk' (44%) and 'low-risk' (41%). The high-risk class demonstrated increased odds of failing to recover post-operatively compared to the other classes. Similarly, the physical-/social-risk class demonstrated increased odds of failing to recover in all outcomes and time points compared to the low-risk class. Biopsychosocial factors with higher prevalence in the high versus low-risk class were depression (92.5% vs. 10.6%), multiple morbidities (55.3% vs. 25.7%) and obesity (59.5% vs. 37.2%). This study introduces novel non-recovery phenotypes for older adults undergoing lumbar surgery and may lead to the development of tailored interventions to improve clinical care and outcomes for this population.

The Collective Influence of Social Determinants of Health on Individuals Who Underwent Lumbar Spine Revision Surgeries: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the collective effect of social determinants of health (SDH) on lumbar spine revision surgery outcomes using a retrospective cohort study design. METHODS: Data from the Quality Outcomes Database were used, including 7889 adults who received lumbar spine revision surgery and completed 3 and 12 months' follow-up. The SDH of interest included race/ethnicity, educational attainment, employment status, insurance payer, and sex. A stepwise regression model using each number of SDH conditions present (0 of 5, 1 of 5, 2 of 5, ≥3 of 5) was used to assess the collective influence of SDH. The odds of demonstrating a minimum clinically important difference was evaluated in back and leg, disability, quality of life, and patient satisfaction at 3-months and 12-months follow-up. RESULTS: An additive effect for SDH was found across all outcome variables at 3 and 12 months. Individuals with ≥3 SDH were at the lowest odds of meeting the minimum clinically important difference of each outcome. At 12 months, individuals with ≥3 SDH had a 67%, 65%, 71%, 65%, and 46% decrease in the odds of a clinically meaningful outcome in back and leg pain, disability, quality of life, and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Health care teams should evaluate SDH in individuals who may be considered for lumbar spine revision surgery. Viewing social factors in aggregate may be useful as a screening tool for lumbar spine revision surgeries to identify at risk patients who may require pre-emptive care strategies and postoperative resources to mitigate these risks.

What is the believability of evidence that is read or heard by physical therapists?

BACKGROUND: Physical therapists obtain information from a variety of sources. The sources may influence their believability and use in clinical practice. OBJECTIVES: In this hypothesis-based study, we queried physical therapists (PTs) on the believability of evidence across six musculoskeletal treatment domains and analyzed variables that predicted the strength of beliefs. METHODS: This international survey included six different language portals and used a snowball dispensation strategy. PTs who were credentialed, licensed, or who practiced in the field, were queried on the believability of six treatment domains (i.e., exercise, manual therapy, psychologically-informed practice, sports/occupational performance, thermal/electrical agents, and pain science/patient education) and potential predictors of believability (i.e., social media use, years of practice, time and access to literature, specialization, confidence in reviewing literature and attributions of the researcher). RESULTS: In total, 1098 PTs from 36 countries completed the survey. PTs had strong beliefs in what they read or hear about exercise, sports/occupational performance, pain science/patient education, and psychologically-informed interventions. There was only moderate believability regarding manual therapy treatment and weak believability associated with thermal/electrical agents. Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that the most robust predictor to outcome relationships included time and access to literature and believability of pain science/patient education, years of clinical practice and believability of psychologically informed practice, and believability of thermal/electrical agents. CONCLUSION: An important takeaway from this study is that believability was influenced by several factors (primarily by years of practice, attributions of the researcher, and time and access to literature) and appeared to vary across treatment domains.

Effectiveness of the back school and mckenzie techniques in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain: a protocol of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chronic low back pain is a highly prevalent condition, which is associated with high direct and indirect costs to the society. Although this condition is highly prevalent, it is still extremely difficult to treat. Two potentially useful treatments for patients with chronic low back pain are called the McKenzie and Back School treatment programs. These programs have good biological plausibility, are widely available and have a modest cost. Although these treatments are already available for patients, the evidence that supports their use is largely based on low quality methodological studies. Therefore, a high-quality randomised controlled trial is required to compare, for the first time, the effectiveness of these treatments in patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS/DESIGN: One hundred and forty-eight patients will be randomly allocated to a four-week treatment program based upon the McKenzie or Back School principles. Clinical outcomes (pain intensity, disability, quality of life, and trunk flexion range of motion) will be obtained at follow-up appointments at 1, 3 and 6 months after randomisation. The data will be collected by an assessor who will be blinded to the group allocation. DISCUSSION: This will be the first study aimed to compare the McKenzie and Back School approaches in patients with chronic low back pain. The results of this trial may help in the decision-making process of allied health providers for the treatment of chronic low back pain and reduce the health-related costs of this condition. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12610000435088.

Psychological, mobility, and satisfaction variables mediate the relationship between baseline back pain intensity and long-term outcomes in individuals who underwent lumbar spine surgery.

BACKGROUND: In patients who receive spine surgery, pain is relational to disability and quality of life, but exactly how this influence is mediated is not fully understood. Mediation analyses allow an understanding of a known relationship by exploring the underlying mechanism or processes by which one variable influences another. OBJECTIVES: To determine the mediating influence of psychological, mobility, and satisfaction variables on the relationship between preoperative back pain intensity and 12-month disability and quality of life in individuals who underwent lumbar spine surgery. DESIGN: This mediation analysis study used data from the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Lumbar Spine Surgical Registry. METHODS: There were included individuals who received lumbar spine surgery for degenerative spine conditions. The exposure variable was preoperative back pain intensity. Mediator variables were depression/anxiety, mobility, and satisfaction. Outcomes included disability and quality of life. Separate multiple mediator models were conducted using the Hayes PROCESS, Model 4 with bias-corrected bootstrapping (5000 samples) to predict disability and quality of life. RESULTS: 26,130 individuals (n = 13,740 males, mean age 60.2 [SD = 13.8) were included. We observed a significant indirect effect through the mediators (anxiety/depression, mobility and satisfaction), for both disability (b = 0.31, 95%CI = 0.26, 0.35) and quality of life (b = -0.44, 95%CI = -0.48, -0.41). CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the relationship between preoperative back pain intensity (exposure) and long-term disability and quality of life (outcomes) is partially mediated by anxiety/depression, mobility, and patient satisfaction in individuals who received lumbar spine surgery.

True Differences in Poor Outcome Risks Between Revision and Primary Lumbar Spine Surgeries.

Background: Previous studies have shown that the rates of complications associated with revision spine surgery are higher than those of primary spine surgery. However, there is a lack of research exploring the difference in magnitude of risk of poor outcomes between primary and revision lumbar spine surgeries. Purposes: We sought to compare the risks of poor outcomes for primary and revision lumbar spine surgeries and to analyze different measures of risk to better understand the true differences between the 2 forms of surgery. Methods: This retrospective observational study used data from the Quality Outcomes Database Lumbar Spine Surgical Registry from 2012 to 2018. We included individuals who received primary or revision surgery due to degenerative lumbar disorders. Outcome variables collected were complications within 30 days of surgery and 3 destination variables, specifically, (1) 30-day hospital readmission, (2) 30-day return to operating room, and (3) revision surgery within 3 months. Measures of risk considered were odds ratio (OR), relative risk (RR), relative risk increase (RRI), and absolute risk increase (ARI). Results: There were 31,843 individuals who received primary surgery and 7889 who received revision surgery. After controlling for baseline descriptive variables and comorbidities, revision surgery increased the odds of 4 complications and all 3 destination variables. Risk ratios reflected smaller magnitudes but similar findings as the statistically significant ORs. Conclusion: Revision surgery is related to higher overall risks than primary surgery, but the true magnitudes of these risks are very small. RRI and ARI should be included when reporting ORs to better clarify the significance.

Adherence to Stepped Care for Management of Musculoskeletal Knee Pain Leads to Lower Health Care Utilization, Costs, and Recurrence.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to report compliance with stepped care management of patellofemoral pain and determine whether adherence to stepped care results in decreased recurrence and lower health care utilization. METHODS: A total of 60,730 participants were included, using data from the Military Health System Data Repository, a large single-payer government health system. Outcomes included total knee-related care visits and costs, knee surgeries, opioid prescriptions, and 2-year recurrence. Stepped care was based on interventions delivered within the appropriate timing and in the appropriate order (low risk/cost before high risk/cost). RESULTS: A total of 54,460 (89.7%) participants received adherent Step 1 care, 10,964 (18.1%) received step 2, and 4168 (6.9%) received step 3. A total of 32.0% and 50.8%, respectively, of all patients in Step 2 and Step 3 care were adherent. Of the 2385 participants (3.9% of cohort) that received both Step 2 and Step 3 care, 24.8% of participants received adherent care. For participants receiving both Step 2 and Step 3 care, adherence resulted in cost savings (mean difference [MD] $1708; 95% confidence interval [CI]: $1241, 2175), fewer knee-related visits (MD 3.4; 95% CI 2.2, 4.7), fewer episodes of knee pain (MD 0.7; 95% CI 0.5, 0.8), fewer knee surgeries (adjusted odds ratio 0.4; 95% CI 0.3, 0.5), and fewer opioid prescriptions (adjusted odds ratio 0.6; 95% CI 0.5, 0.8). CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate the value of following stepped care guidelines for pain management in patients with patellofemoral pain.

The Influence of Unemployment and Disability Status on Clinical Outcomes in Patients Receiving Surgery for Low Back-Related Disorders: An Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: Employment status plays an essential role as a social determinant of health. Unemployed are more likely to have a longer length of hospital stay and a nearly twofold greater rate of 30 day readmission than those who were well employed at the time of back surgery. This study aimed to investigate whether employment status influenced post-surgery outcomes and if so, the differences were clinically meaningful among groups. METHODS: This retrospective observational study used data from the Quality Outcomes Database Lumbar Registry. Data refinement was used to isolate individuals 18 to 64 who received primary spine surgeries and had a designation of employed, unemployed, or disabled. Outcomes included 12 and 24 month back and leg pain, disability, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. Differences in descriptive variables, comorbidities, and outcomes measures (at 12 and 24 months) were analyzed using chi-square and linear mixed-effects modeling. When differences were present among groups, we evaluated whether they were clinically significant or not. RESULTS: Differences (between employed, unemployed, and disabled) among baseline characteristics and comorbidities were present in nearly every category (p<0.01). In all cases, those who were disabled represented the least healthy, followed by unemployed, and then employed. Clinically meaningful differences for all outcomes were present at 12 and 24 months (p<0.01). In post hoc analyses, differences between each group at nearly all periods were found. CONCLUSIONS: The findings support that the health-related characteristics are markedly different among employment status groups. Group designation strongly differentiated outcomes. These findings suggest that disability and unemployment should be considered when determining prognosis of the individual.

Why Measure Patient Experience in Physical Therapy?

BACKGROUND: Patient experience is an important component of quality and patient centered health care not fully explored in physical therapy. MAIN BODY: This article addresses (1) concept of patient experience, (2) importance of capturing the patient experience, (3) measures to capture patient experience and whether these measures exhibit psychometrically sound measurement properties, (4) relationship between patient experience and clinical effectiveness outcomes, and (5) clinical applications of patient experience measures in the outpatient physical therapy setting, including suggestions for future studies. SHORT CONCLUSION: Employing patient experience measures into physical therapy practice may be an important key to improve clinical effectiveness outcomes and provide excellent patient-centered care delivery. An area of continued research should be focused on demonstrating the generalizability and measurement properties of patient reported experience measures for the musculoskeletal outpatient physical therapy population focusing first on the most common musculoskeletal conditions such as cervical, low back, and shoulder pain.

Discharge destination influences risks of readmission and complications after lumbar spine surgery in severely disabled patients.

OBJECTIVE: For individuals with severe disability requiring spine surgery, appropriate discharge destination is a challenging and complex decision. Past studies have found associations between discharge destination and postoperative outcomes but were limited by biases in sampling characteristics. The purpose of this study was to explore whether there is an association between discharge destination and odds of worse postoperative outcomes in high-risk individuals with severe/crippling/bedbound disability who received lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: This was an observational study using the Quality Outcomes Database Spine Registry. Subjects were limited to age ≥18 years, primary lumbar spine surgery, and severe disability at baseline (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] ≥50%). Discharge destination was dichotomized to home or healthcare institution. RESULTS: Of the 13,050 patients, 11,859 patients (90.9%) were discharged home and 1191 (9.1%) patients were discharged to a healthcare institution. Individuals who were discharged to a healthcare institution were older (68.6 vs 56.9 p < 0.001) and had worse baseline characteristics (higher American Society of Anesthesiology [ASA] score, presence of back pain, and prevalence of comorbidities, all p < 0.001) compared to those who were discharged home. In covariate-controlled multivariate analysis, the home discharge cohort had lower rates of hospital readmission (OR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.55, 0.84) and revision surgery (OR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.37, 0.85) within three months and return to operating room (OR = 0.46, 95% CI 0.34-0.63) and complications (all OR < 0.50 except hematoma, p < 0.01) within 30 days than the institution discharge cohort. CONCLUSION: Severity of disability measured by ODI may influence but does not dictate discharge destination and the associated postoperative outcomes.

Construct Validity and Item Response Theory Analysis of the PROMIS-29 v2.0 in Recipients of Lumbar Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort design involving measurement property assessment. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess construct validity through hypothesis testing and to examine reliability and discrimination of the PROMIS-29 v2.0 using item response theory (IRT) analyses. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) 29.0 version 2.0 includes 28 questions for the seven domains of Physical function, Anxiety, Depression, Fatigue, Sleep disturbance, Social role, and Pain interference, and one item related to pain intensity. To date, the tool has not been tested for construct validity for selected concepts, nor has it been evaluated using IRT in a population of spine surgery recipients. METHODS: Using the Quality Outcomes Dataset lumbar registry, we evaluated the construct validity of the PROMIS-29 v2.0 against pain intensity measures for back and leg, the Oswestry Disability Index, the EQ5D 3L-visual analog scale (quality of life) and proxy measures of activities, mobility and self-care. IRT was used to test PROMIS-29 v2.0 assumptions and fit. RESULTS: The sample included 652 surgery recipients (mean age = 60.1, SD = 14.0) who had a high level of baseline disability. Hypothesis testing confirmed direction and magnitude of correlation between the PROMIS and legacy measures in 10 of the 12 hypotheses. IRT identified three misfit items, but otherwise adequate scale reliability and unidimensionality. CONCLUSION: The PROMIS-29 v2.0 measures several different constructs pertinent to a patient's health and recovery during spine surgery. We feel that the PROMIS-29 v2.0 tool is a useful and effective outcome measure for populations who receive spine surgery.Level of Evidence: 4.

Measurement Properties of the Oswestry Disability Index in Recipients of Lumbar Spine Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: This is an observational study on the measurement properties of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) version 1.0. OBJECTIVES: To (1) determine the construct validity of the tool, specifically structural validity; (2) analyze the criterion validity of the tool, specifically concurrent validity against proxy measures of pain, function, and quality of life and predictive validity of each item to proxy measures of disability; and (3) reliability of the tool, specifically internal consistency. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: We endeavored to investigate the measurement properties of the ODI on a spine surgery population to test the assumption that a more disabled population may influence the properties of the tool. METHODS: Data were pulled from the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Spine Registry. A total of 57,199 participants who underwent primary or revision lumbar spine surgeries were included. Structural validity was assessed by exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis, concurrent validity, predictive validity by odds ratios, and internal consistency by Cronbach alpha. The Visual Analog Scale for back pain, two standard open questions, and the EuroQol 5 Dimension/Visual Analogue Scale were included as proxy measures of pain, function, and quality of life, respectively. Hospital readmission, return to operating room for treatment and revision surgery (all within 30 days) were included as proxy measures of disability to assess the predictive validity of each ODI item. RESULTS: The ODI demonstrated a two-factor structural solution, which explained 54.9% of the total variance. Fair internal consistency (0.74-0.77), and fair criterion validity (concurrent) and significant findings with predictive validity (P < 0.01) substantiated the use of each item of the ODI as well as the summary score and ODI thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: Our study lends value to a burgeoning repository of evidence that suggests the ODI is a useful tool for capturing outcomes in clinical practice. We recommend its continued use in clinical practice.Level of Evidence: 4.

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment for Gluteal Tendinopathy patient reported-outcome measure (VISA-G.BR).

BACKGROUND: Different outcome measures can be used to assess pain and disability in individuals with Greater Trochanteric Pain Syndrome (GTPS), including the Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment for Gluteal Tendinopathy (VISA-G), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS) and Global Perceived Effect (GPE). OBJECTIVE: To translate, cross-culturally adapt and validate VISA-G to Brazilian Portuguese and to evaluate the measurement properties of the VISA-G.BR, ODI, GPE, and PSFS in individuals with GTPS. DESIGN: This is a longitudinal clinimetric study. METHODS: Sixty-eight individuals with GTPS participated in this study. The questionnaires VISA-G.BR, ODI, PSFS, and GPE were administered to participants at the initial assessment, 24-48 h and 30 days after the initial assessment. Internal consistency and construct validity for the VISA-G.BR were assessed. Reliability, agreement, ceiling and floor effect, and responsiveness were described for all instruments. RESULTS: The Cronbach Alpha for internal consistency value for VISA-G.BR was 0.65. The construct validity analysis showed a strong correlation value between ODI and VISA-G.BR (r = -0.77). The agreement analysis performed for all questionnaires showed standard error of measurement values ranging from 0.64 (PSFS) to 4.2 (VISA-G.BR). GPE scale had a floor effect. The responsiveness analysis performed for all questionnaires showed low values of effect size ranging from -0.07 to 0.3. CONCLUSION: The VISA-G.BR is a valid and reliable instrument to assess the disability of individuals with GTPS. The ODI and PSFS instruments can also be used in the evaluation of this population.

Effect of change in preoperative depression/anxiety on patient outcomes following lumbar spine surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the association between positive change in depression or anxiety within three months post-operation and clinically meaningful changes in long-term clinical outcomes after lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: This study included adults with preoperative diagnosis of depression or anxiety who underwent lumbar spine surgery in the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) from 2012 to 2018 with either a 12- or 24-month follow-up. Positive change in depression and anxiety was assessed three months after surgery. Clinical outcomes measured included Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score for back pain (BP) and leg pain (LP), Oswestry Disability Index score (ODI) for disability, EuroQol Visual Analog Scale score (EQ-VAS) for health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and North American Spine Surgery (NASS) index score for patient satiaction measured at 12- and 24 months after surgery. RESULTS: Of the 9,656 and 1,393 patients who were included in the 12- and 24-month cohort, respectively, 7,277 patients (75.4 %) and 1,089 (78.2 %) experienced a positive change in depression or anxiety within three months after surgery. At both 12- and 24-month follow-up, patients who had positive change in depression or anxiety were more likely to achieve minimal clinically important changes in NRS-BP/LP, ODI, EQ-VAS, and NASS (all p < 0.01) compared to those who did not experience improvement in depression or anxiety. CONCLUSION: Depression and anxiety are important comorbidities to consider in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. Positive change in depression and anxiety are associated with improvements in pain, disability, satisfaction, and overall functioning.

Measurement properties of quality assessment tools for studies of diagnostic accuracy.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the reliability, internal consistency, measurement error, convergent validity, and floor and ceiling effects of three quality assessment tools commonly used to evaluate the quality of diagnostic test accuracy studies in physical therapy. A secondary aim was to describe the quality of a sample of diagnostic accuracy studies. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: 50 studies were randomly selected from a comprehensive database of physical therapy-relevant diagnostic accuracy studies. Two reviewers independently rated each study with the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS), Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2) and Diagnostic Accuracy Quality Scale (DAQS) tools in random sequence. RESULTS: Only 7% of QUADAS items, 14% of QUADAS-2 items, and 33% of DAQS items had at least moderate inter-rater reliability (kappa>0.40). Internal consistency and convergent validity measures were acceptable (>0.70) in 33% and 50% of cases respectively. Floor or ceiling effects were not present in any tool. The quality of studies was mixed: most avoided case-control sampling strategies and used the same reference standard on all subjects, but many failed to enroll a consecutive or random sample of subjects or provide confidence intervals about estimates of diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSION: The QUADAS, QUADAS-2 and DAQS tools provide unreliable estimates of the quality of studies of diagnostic accuracy in physical therapy.

Common musculoskeletal impairments in postpartum runners: an international Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum runners report musculoskeletal pain with running. Because of inadequate research, little is known about the origin and pain-related classification. Through expert consensus, this study is the first attempt to understand the musculoskeletal impairments that these runners present with. The objective of this survey was to gather expert consensus on characteristics of reported impairments in postpartum runners that have musculoskeletal pain. METHODS: A web-based Delphi survey was conducted and was composed of five categories: strength, range of motion, alignment and flexibility impairments, as well as risk factors for pain in postpartum runners. RESULTS: A total of 117 experts were invited. Forty-five experts completed round I and forty-one completed rounds II and III. The strength impairments that reached consensus were abdominal, hip and pelvic floor muscle weakness. The range of motion impairments that reached consensus were hip extension restriction, anterior pelvic tilt and general hypermobility. The alignment impairments that reached consensus were a Trendelenburg sign, dynamic knee valgus, lumbar lordosis, over-pronation and thoracic kyphosis. The flexibility impairments that reached consensus were abdominal wall laxity, and tightness in hip flexors, lumbar extensors, iliotibial band and hamstrings. The risk factors for pain in postpartum runners were muscular imbalance, poor lumbopelvic control, too much too soon, life stressors, pain during pregnancy and pelvic floor trauma. CONCLUSION: This study presents a framework for clinicians to understand pain in postpartum runners and that can be investigated in future cohort studies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 5.

Quantifying the collective influence of social determinants of health using conditional and cluster modeling.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to analyze the collective effect of social determinants of health (SDoH) on lumbar spine surgery outcomes utilizing two different statistical methods of combining variables. METHODS: This observational study analyzed data from the Quality Outcomes Database, a nationwide United States spine registry. Race/ethnicity, educational attainment, employment status, insurance payer, and gender were predictors of interest. We built two models to assess the collective influence of SDoH on outcomes following lumbar spine surgery-a stepwise model using each number of SDoH conditions present (0 of 5, 1 of 5, 2 of 5, etc) and a clustered subgroup model. Logistic regression analyses adjusted for age, multimorbidity, surgical indication, type of lumbar spine surgery, and surgical approach were performed to identify the odds of failing to demonstrate clinically meaningful improvements in disability, back pain, leg pain, quality of life, and patient satisfaction at 3- and 12-months following lumbar spine surgery. RESULTS: Stepwise modeling outperformed individual SDoH when 4 of 5 SDoH were present. Cluster modeling revealed 4 distinct subgroups. Disparities between the younger, minority, lower socioeconomic status and the younger, white, higher socioeconomic status subgroups were substantially wider compared to individual SDoH. DISCUSSION: Collective and cluster modeling of SDoH better predicted failure to demonstrate clinically meaningful improvements than individual SDoH in this cohort. Viewing social factors in aggregate rather than individually may offer more precise estimates of the impact of SDoH on outcomes.

Long-term impact of obesity on patient-reported outcomes and patient satisfaction after lumbar spine surgery: an observational study.

OBJECTIVE: Obese body habitus is a challenging issue to address in lumbar spine surgery. There is a lack of consensus on the long-term influence of BMI on patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction. This study aimed to examine the differences in patient-reported outcomes over the course of 12 and 24 months among BMI classifications of patients who underwent lumbar surgery. METHODS: A search was performed using the Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) Spine Registry from 2012 to 2018 to identify patients who underwent lumbar surgery and had either a 12- or 24-month follow-up. Patients were categorized based on their BMI as normal weight (≤ 25 kg/m2), overweight (25-30 kg/m2), obese (30-40 kg/m2), and morbidly obese (> 40 kg/m2). Outcomes included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain (BP) and leg pain (LP), and patient satisfaction was measured at 12 and 24 months postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 31,765 patients were included. At both the 12- and 24-month follow-ups, those who were obese and morbidly obese had worse ODI, VAS-BP, and VAS-LP scores (all p < 0.01) and more frequently rated their satisfaction as "I am the same or worse than before treatment" (all p < 0.01) compared with those who were normal weight. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that the BMI cutoffs for predicting worsening disability and surgery dissatisfaction were 30.1 kg/m2 and 29.9 kg/m2 for the 12- and 24-month follow-ups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Higher BMI was associated with poorer patient-reported outcomes and satisfaction at both the 12- and 24-month follow-ups. BMI of 30 kg/m2 is the cutoff for predicting worse patient outcomes after lumbar surgery.