The Oswestry Disability Index

Fairbank, Jeremy; Pynsent, Paul

doi:10.1097/00007632-200011150-00017

Cited by 4,683 publications

(3,296 citation statements)

References 136 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

3,149

Contrasting

Unclassified

111

Order By: Relevance

“…The neurological deficits (paresis grade according to British Medical Research Council, radicular sensory loss) were recorded. The evaluation of their functional capacity was conducted by using the Oswestry low back pain questionnaire [8,22,23].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of a minimally invasive procedure versus standard microscopic discotomy: a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial

Franke

Greiner-Perth²,

Boehm

et al. 2009

Eur Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Prospective randomised controlled study was done to determine statistical difference between the standard microsurgical discotomy (MC) and a minimally invasive microscopic procedure for disc prolapse surgery by comparing operation duration and clinical outcome. Additionally, the transferability of the results was determined by a bicentric design. The microscopic assisted percutaneous nucleotomy (MAPN) has been advocated as a minimally invasive tubular technique. Proponents have claimed that minimally invasive procedures reduce postoperative pain and accelerate the recovery. In addition, there exist only a limited number of well-designed comparison studies comparing standard microdiscotomy to a tubular minimally invasive technique that support this claim. Furthermore, there are no well-designed studies looking at the transferability of those results and possible learning curve phenomena. We studied 100 patients, who were planned for disc prolapse surgery at two centres [50 patients at the developing centre (index) and 50 patients at the less experienced (transfer) centre]. The randomisation was done separately for each centre, employing a blockrandomisation procedure with respect to age and preoperative Oswestry score. Operation duration was chosen as a primary outcome parameter as there was a distinguished shortening observed in a preliminary study at the index centre enabling a sound case number estimation. The following data were compared between the two groups and the centres with a 12-month follow-up: surgical times (operation duration and approach duration), the clinical results, leg and back pain by visual analogue scale, the Oswestry disability index, length of hospital stay, return to work time, and complications. The operation duration was statistically identical for MC (57.8 ± 20.2 min) at the index centre and for MAPN (50.3 ± 18.3 min) and MC (54.7 ± 18.1 min) at the transfer centre. The operation duration was only significantly shorter for the MAPN technique at the index centre with 33.3 min (SD 12.1 min). There was a huge clinical improvement for all patients regardless of centre or method revealed by a repeated measures ANOVA for all follow-up visits Separate post hoc ANOVAs for each centre revealed that there was a significant time-method (MAPN vs. MC) interaction at the index centre (F = 3.75, P = 0.006), whereas this crucial interaction was not present at the transfer centre (F = 0.5, P = 0.7). These results suggest a slightly faster clinical recovery for the MAPN patients only at the index centre. This was due to a greater reduction in VAS score for back pain at discharge, 8-week and 6-month follow up (P \ 0.002). The Oswestry-disability scores reached a significant improvement compared to the initial values extending over the complete follow-up at both centres for J. Franke and R. Greiner-Perth contributed equally to this work. both methods without revealing any differences for the two methods in either centre. There was no difference regarding complications. The results demonstrate...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of a minimally invasive procedure versus standard microscopic discotomy: a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial

Franke

Greiner-Perth²,

Boehm

et al. 2009

Eur Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, despite common use, this PROM does not cover the full clinical presentation of ASD by failing to evaluate neurologic and pulmonary dysfunction, noted before and after ASD surgery [44,45]. This can be explained by the fact that the ODI was introduced as a PROM to assess the functional status in low back pain patients, rather than for ASD patients [47]. Currently, there are no other condition-specific outcome measurements for spine deformity patients other than the Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) questionnaire.…”

Section: Proms In Asd Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The SRS-22 appears to have Eur Spine J (2017) 26:2084-2093 2089 the highest level of clinimetric quality compared to the ODI, SF-12, and SF-36 and seems most suitable in the ASD population (Table 4). The ODI has demonstrated to be a reliable and valid tool to measure the functional status in the low back pain patients [47]. More research is needed to demonstrate the specific clinimetric properties of the ODI, SF-36, and SF-12 in the ASD population.…”

Section: Clinimetric Properties Of Promsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring outcomes in adult spinal deformity surgery: a systematic review to identify current strengths, weaknesses and gaps in patient-reported outcome measures

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Adult spinal deformity (ASD) causes severe disability, reduces overall quality of life, and results in a substantial societal burden of disease. As healthcare is becoming more value based, and to facilitate global benchmarking, it is critical to identify and standardize patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). This study aims to identify the current strengths, weaknesses, and gaps in PROMs used for ASD. Methods Studies were included following a systematic search in multiple bibliographic databases between 2000 and 2015. PROMs were extracted and linked to the outcome domains of WHO's International Classification of Functioning and Health (ICF) framework. Subsequently, the clinimetric quality of identified PROMs was evaluated. Results The literature search identified 144 papers that met the inclusion criteria, and nine frequently used PROMs were identified. These covered 29 ICF outcome domains, which could be grouped into three of the four main ICF chapters: body function (n = 7), activity and participation (n = 19), environmental factors (n = 3), and body structure (n = 0). A low quantity (n = 3) of papers was identified that studied the clinimetric quality of PROMs. The Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22 has the highest level of clinimetric quality for ASD. Conclusions Outcome domains related to mobility and pain were well represented. We identified a gap in current outcome measures regarding neurological and pulmonary function. In addition, no outcome domains were measured in the ICF chapter body structure. These results will serve as a foundation for the process of seeking international consensus on a standard set of outcome domains, accompanied PROMs and contributing factors to be used in future clinical trials and spine registries.

show abstract

“…Patients were included if their age ranged between 18 and 60 years old, if they had a first-time single-level (L4-L5 or L5-S1) paramedian disc herniation indicative for surgical intervention and if they reported a score of at least 10% on the Oswestry Disability Index (version 2.1.a, adapted Dutch version) (ODI-2) after surgery (Fairbank and Pynsent, 2000). Participants were excluded from the study in case of previous spinal surgery, median disc herniation, vestibular or neurological disorders, significant neurological deficit (paresis N 4/5), lower limb problems, or work accident.…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Disability related to LBP was evaluated with the ODI-2 (Fairbank and Pynsent, 2000). The Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK) from 17 ('low') to 68 ('high') was completed to identify the participants' fear of (re)injury following movements or activities (Kori et al, 1990).…”

Section: Secondary Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proprioceptive use and sit-to-stand-to-sit after lumbar microdiscectomy: The effect of surgical approach and early physiotherapy

Janssens

Brumagne

Claeys

et al. 2016

Clinical Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Individuals with non-specific low back pain show decreased reliance on lumbosacral proprioceptive signals and slower sit-to-stand-to-sit performance. However, little is known in patients after lumbar microdiscectomy. Methods: Patients were randomly assigned into transmuscular (n = 12) or paramedian lumbar surgery (n = 13). After surgery, the same patients were randomly assigned into individualized active physiotherapy starting 2 weeks after surgery (n = 12) or usual care (n = 13). Primary outcomes were center of pressure displacement during ankle and back muscles vibration (to evaluate proprioceptive use), and the duration of five sit-to-stand-to-sit movements, evaluated at 2 (baseline), 8 and 24 weeks after surgery. Findings: Two weeks after surgery, all patients showed smaller responses to back compared to ankle muscles vibration (P b 0.05). Patients that underwent a transmuscular surgical procedure and patients that received physiotherapy switched to larger responses to back muscles vibration at 24 weeks, compared to 2 weeks after surgery (P b 0.005), although not seen in the paramedian group and usual care group (P N 0.05). Already 8 weeks after surgery, the physiotherapy group needed significantly less time to perform five sit-to-stand-to-sit movements compared to the usual care group (P b 0.05). Interpretation: Shortly after lumbar microdiscectomy, patients favor reliance on ankle proprioceptive signals over lumbosacral proprioceptive reliance to maintain posture, which resembles the behavior of patients with non-specific low back pain. However, early active physiotherapy after lumbar microdiscectomy facilitated higher reliance on lumbosacral proprioceptive signals and early improvement of sit-to-stand-to-sit performance. Transmuscular lumbar surgery favoured recovery of lumbosacral proprioception 6 months after surgery. Clinical Trial Number: NCT01505595

show abstract

The Oswestry Disability Index

Cited by 4,683 publications

References 136 publications

Comparison of a minimally invasive procedure versus standard microscopic discotomy: a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial

Comparison of a minimally invasive procedure versus standard microscopic discotomy: a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial

Measuring outcomes in adult spinal deformity surgery: a systematic review to identify current strengths, weaknesses and gaps in patient-reported outcome measures

Proprioceptive use and sit-to-stand-to-sit after lumbar microdiscectomy: The effect of surgical approach and early physiotherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About