COMPARISON BETWEEN MODIFIED OSWESTRY LOW BACK PAIN DISABILITY QUESTIONNAIRE AND ABERDEEN LOW BACK PAIN SCALE TAKING LOW BACK-SPECIFIC VERSION OF THE SF-36 PHYSICAL FUNCTIONING SCALE AS A GOLD STANDARD IN PATIENTS WITH LOW BACK PAIN

  • Dheeraj Lamba Department of Physiotherapy, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia,
  • Ritambhara K Upadhyay Department of Technology , Jimma Institute of Technology, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia.

Abstract

Objective: The objective of the study was to compare the modified Oswestry low back pain (LBP) disability questionnaire with Aberdeen LBP scale (ABPS) and to find out which scale is better for functional assessment in LBP patients.

Methods: A total of 100 randomly selected patients who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were recruited for the study. Modified Oswestry LBP disability questionnaire and ABPS were compared with a gold standard that is a low back-specific Version of the SF-36 Physical Functioning Scale. Statistical comparison was done using one-way ANOVA to find out which scale is better for assessing functional disability in LBP patients.

Results: On analyzing the results using one-way ANOVA both the scales, i.e., modified Oswestry disability questionnaire and ABPS showed significant values indicating that both are equally reliable and effective tools and either can be used as outcome measurement tool in patients suffering from LBP.

Conclusion: The present study concludes that the modified Oswestry disability questionnaire and Aberdeen low back scale both are equally reliable and effective outcome measurement tools for the assessment of patients suffering from LBP.

Keywords: Low back pain, Modified OSW, Aberdeen low back pain scale, LB-SF36 and ROM.

Author Biography

Dheeraj Lamba, Department of Physiotherapy, Jimma University, Jimma, Ethiopia,
Associate Professor, Research Coordinator and Academic Operations Coordintor (AOC)

References

1. Burton AK, Balagué F. European Guidelines for Prevention in Low Back Pain. Back Pain in Europe; 2004.
2. Suarez-Almazor M, Kendall E. Use of health status measures in patients with low back pain in clinical settings. Comparison of specific, generic and preference-based instruments. Rheumatology 2000;39:783-90.
3. Shyamal K, Gurpreet S. Severity of disability in elderly patients with low back pain in Amritsar Punjab. Arthropologist 2008;10:265-8.
4. Liebenson C. Rehabilitation of the Spine: A Practitioner’s Manual. 2nd ed. Baltimore: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007.
5. Boonen A, Rasker JJ. The international classification for functioning, disability and health. Clin Rheumatol 2007;26:1803-8.
6. Tripathy A, Adiga S, Shah HH, Shanbhag T, Kumar DA. Retrospective study of clinical profile and drug prescribing pattern in osteoporosis in a tertiary care hospital. Int J Pharm Pharm Sci 2015b;7:390-3.
7. Davidson M, Keating JL. A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: Reliability and responsiveness. Phys Ther 2002;82:8 24.
8. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to their Development and Use. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1995.
9. Fritz JM, Irrgang JJ. A comparison of a modified Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire and the Quebec back pain disability scale. Phys Ther 2001;81:776-8.
10. Muller U, Duetz MS. Condition-specific outcome measures for low back pain. Spine 2004;13:301-3.
11. Ruta DA, Garatte AM, Wardlaw D, Russell IT. Developing a valid and reliable measure of health out patients with low back pain. Spine 1994;19:1887-96.
12. Davidson M, Keating JL. A low back-specific version of the SF-36 physical functioning scale. Spine 2004;29:586-4.
13. Pandey K, Vinay D. Quantification and classification of low back pain severity based on Aberdeen low back pain scale. J Appl Natl Sci 2015;7:92-7.
Statistics
124 Views | 216 Downloads
Citatons
How to Cite
Lamba, D., and R. K Upadhyay. “COMPARISON BETWEEN MODIFIED OSWESTRY LOW BACK PAIN DISABILITY QUESTIONNAIRE AND ABERDEEN LOW BACK PAIN SCALE TAKING LOW BACK-SPECIFIC VERSION OF THE SF-36 PHYSICAL FUNCTIONING SCALE AS A GOLD STANDARD IN PATIENTS WITH LOW BACK PAIN”. Asian Journal of Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research, Vol. 11, no. 11, Nov. 2018, pp. 97-99, doi:10.22159/ajpcr.2018.v11i11.27909.
Section
Original Article(s)