The Traumatic Injuries Distress Scale: A New Tool That Quantifies Distress and Has Predictive Validity With Patient-Reported Outcomes

Abstract

® T t STUDY DESIGN: Observational cohort. T t BACKGROUND:Outcomes for acute musculoskeletal injuries are currently suboptimal, with an estimated 10% to 50% of injured individuals reporting persistent problems. An early risk-targeted intervention may hold value for improving outcomes. T t OBJECTIVES:To describe the development and preliminary concurrent and longitudinal validation of the Traumatic Injuries Distress Scale (TIDS), a new tool intended to provide the magnitude and nature of risk for persistent problems following acute musculoskeletal injuries. T t METHODS:Two hundred participants recruited from emergency medicine departments and rehabilitation clinics completed the TIDS and a battery of other self-reported questionnaires. A subcohort (n = 76) was followed at 1 week and at 12 weeks after the inciting event. Exploratory factor analysis and concurrent and longitudinal correlations were used to evaluate the ability of the TIDS to predict acute presentation and 12-week outcomes. T t RESULTS:Exploratory factor analysis revealed 3 factors explaining 62.8% of total scale variance. Concurrent and longitudinal associations with established clinical measures supported the nature of each subscale. Scores on the TIDS at baseline were significantly associated with variability in disability, pain intensity, satisfaction, anxiety, and depression at 12 weeks postinjury, with adequate accuracy to endorse its use as part of a broader screening protocol. Limitations to interpretation are discussed. T t CONCLUSION:We present the initial psychometric properties of a new measure of acute posttraumatic distress following musculoskeletal injury. The subscales may be useful as stratification variables in subsequent investigations of clinical interventions.

Multidimensional screening for predicting pain problems in adults: a systematic review of screening tools and validation studies

“…Finally, a number of eligible screening tools for which items were available in the literature were not included in the current review as no independent validation studies were retrieved from the electronic database search nor through cited reference search of the development articles of the screening tools (ie, “Absenteeism Screening Questionnaire” 116 ; “Back Disability Risk Questionnaire” 103,104 ; “Optimal Screening for Prediction of Referral and Outcome cohort yellow flag assessment tool” 58 ; “Pain Recovery Inventory of Concerns and Expectations” 105 ; “Screening-Instrument zur Feststellung des Bedarfs an medizinisch-beruflich orientierter Rehabilitation” 112 ; “Traumatic Injuries Distress Scale” 125 ; and “Work and Health Questionnaire” 1 ).…”

Evaluation of the effects of pain scale and analgesic administration on radiological imaging methods and hospitalization in trauma patients admitted to the emergency service

“…In the initial evaluation of trauma patients, physical examination, plain radiography, ultrasonography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging are used in correlation with pain according to the clinical characteristics of the patient and resources in trauma centers [5,6]. A system particularly based on imaging systems delays intervention and treatment of patients.…”

The Nature of Whiplash in a Compensable Environment: Injury, Disability, Rehabilitation, and Compensation Systems

“…Some compensation environments may even encourage consumers to continue to obtain treatment that provides zero expected benefit or, perhaps, services that have a potential iatrogenic effect. 27 This may occur if the award of compensation for other so-called "heads of damages," such as future and past economic loss (ie, typically lost wage or salary income), general damages (ie, typically awards for pain and suffering), and so on is linked by law or convention to the quantum of medical expenditures associated with the claim, or in jurisdictions where a threshold value applies to claims for various categories of compensation. For instance, if insurers or courts are known to use rule-of-thumb multiples to award general damages-for example, calculating general damages by multiplying medical expenditures by some integer-then claimants face an incentive to "build up" claims to increase the overall quantum of compensation.…”