ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2021
The use of electronic PROMs provides same outcomes as paper version in a spine surgery registry. Results from a prospective cohort study.
Article in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Loss to follow-up after lumbar decompressive surgery: effect of collection method and perioperative factors on patient-reported outcome measures.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- The influence of peri-operative depressive symptoms on medium-term spine surgery outcome: a prospective study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2023Article
- National spine surgery registries' characteristics and aims: globally accepted standards have yet to be met. Results of a scoping review and a complementary survey.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2023Article
- Electronic patient-reported outcomes (e-PROMs) in palliative cancer care: a scoping review.Journal of patient-reported outcomes · 2022Article
- Post-operative L5 radiculopathy after L5-S1 hyperlordotic anterior lumbar interbody fusion (HL-ALIF) is related to a greater increase of lordosis and smaller post-operative posterior disc height: results from a cohort study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2022Article
- Perioperative Predictive Factors for Positive Outcomes in Spine Fusion for Adult Deformity Correction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Article
- The Influence of Baseline Clinical Status and Surgical Strategy on Early Good to Excellent Result in Spinal Lumbar Arthrodesis: A Machine Learning Approach.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposePatient-Reported Measured Outcomes (PROMs) are essential to gain a full understanding of a patient's condition, and in spine surgery, these questionnaires are of help when tailoring a surgical strategy. Electronic registries allow for a systematic collection and storage of PROMs, making them readily available for clinical and research purposes. This study aimed to investigate the reliability between the electronic and paper form of ODI (Oswestry Disability Index), SF-36 (Short Form Health Survey 36) and COMI-back (Core Outcome Measures Index for the back) questionnaires.
methodsA prospective analysis was performed of ODI, SF-36 and COMI-back questionnaires collected in paper and electronic format in two patients' groups: Pre-Operatively (PO) or at follow-up (FU). All patients, in both groups, completed the three questionnaires in paper and electronic form. The correlation between both methods was assessed with the Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC).
resultsThe data from 100 non-consecutive, volunteer patients with a mean age of 55.6 ± 15.0 years were analysed. For all of the three PROMs, the reliability between paper and electronic questionnaires results was excellent (ICC: ODI = 0.96; COMI = 0.98; SF36-MCS = 0.98; SF36-PCS = 0.98. For all p < 0.001).
conclusionsThis study proved an excellent reliability between the electronic and paper versions of ODI, SF-36 and COMI-back questionnaires collected using a spine registry. This validation paves the way for stronger widespread use of electronic PROMs. They offer numerous advantages in terms of accessibility, storage, and data analysis compared to paper questionnaires.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33970326What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.