Dataset Information

Calculating Utilities From the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire: A Necessity for Economic and Decision Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Study design

General population utility valuation study.

Objective

The aim of this study was to develop a technique for calculating utilities from the Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire v2.0 (SOSGOQ2.0).

Summary of background data

The ability to calculate quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) for metastatic spine disease would enhance treatment decision-making and facilitate economic analysis. QALYs are calculated using utilities.

Methods

Using a hybrid concept-retention and factorial analysis shortening approach, we first shortened the SOSGOQ2.0 to eight items (SOSGOQ-8D). This was done to lessen the cognitive burden of the utility valuation exercise. A general population sample of 2730 adults was then asked to evaluate 12 choice sets based on SOSGOQ-8D health states in a Discrete Choice Experiment. A utility scoring rubric was then developed using a mixed multinomial-logit regression model.

Results

We were able to reduce the SOSGOQ2.0 to an SOSGOQ-8D with a mean error of 0.003 and mean absolute error of 3.078 compared to the full questionnaire. The regression model demonstrated good predictive performance and was used to develop a utility scoring rubric. Regression results revealed that participants did not regard all SOSGOQ-8D items as equally important.

Conclusion

We provide a simple technique for converting the SOSGOQ2.0 to utilities. The ability to evaluate QALYs in metastatic spine disease will facilitate economic analysis and patient counseling. We also quantify the importance of individual SOSGOQ-8D items. Clinicians should heed these findings and offer treatments that maximize function in the most important items.Level of Evidence: 3.

SUBMITTER: Pahuta MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8357033 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ) was developed as the first spine oncology-specific health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measure. This study evaluated the psychometric properties and clinical validity of the SOSGOQ in a diverse cohort of patients with spinal metastases.MethodsAn international, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study including patients with spinal metastases who underwent surgery and/or radiotherapy was conducted by the AOSpine Knowledge Forum Tumor. Demographic, tumor, and treatment data were collected. HRQOL was evaluated using the SOSGOQ and Medical Outcomes Study Questionnaire Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) at baseline and fixed follow-up times. Construct validity was assessed using multitrait scaling analyses, confirmatory factor analyses, and correlation with the SF-36 and NRS pain score. Test-retest reliability was assessed in a subgroup of patients between 12 weeks after treatment and the retest 4 to 9 days later.ResultsA total of 238 patients were enrolled at 9 centers across North America; 153 of these patients had HRQOL data available at 12 weeks after treatment. Multitrait scaling analyses and confirmatory factor analyses resulted in a refined version of the SOSGOQ with 4 domains and 4 single items. The revised SOSGOQ (SOSGOQ2.0) demonstrated strong correlations with SF-36 and the ability to discriminate between clinically distinct patient groups. Reliability of the SOSGOQ2.0 was demonstrated to be good, with an intraclass correlation coefficient ranging from 0.58 to 0.92 for the different domains.ConclusionsThe SOSGOQ2.0 is a reliable and valid measure with which to evaluate HRQOL in patients with spinal metastases. It is recommended to use the SOSGOQ2.0 together with a generic HRQOL outcome measure to comprehensively assess HRQOL and increase sensitivity and specificity. Cancer 2018;124:1828-38. © 2018 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Cancer Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

Project description:BackgroundBack pain in children is common and early onset of back pain has been shown to increase the risk of back pain significantly in adulthood. Consequently, preventive efforts must be targeted the young population but research relating to spinal problems in this age group is scarce. Focus has primarily been on the working age population, and therefore specific questionnaires to measure spinal pain and its consequences, specifically aimed at children and adolescents are absent. The purpose of this study was to develop a questionnaire for schoolchildren filling this gap.MethodsThe Young Spine Questionnaire (YSQ) was developed in three phases--a conceptualisation, development and testing phase. The conceptualisation phase followed the Wilson and Cleary model and included questions regarding spinal prevalence estimates, pain frequency and intensity, activity restrictions, care seeking behaviour and influence of parental back trouble. Items from existing questionnaires and the "Revised Faces Pain Scale" (rFPS) were included during the development phase. The testing phase consisted of a mixed quantitative and qualitative iterative method carried out in two pilot tests using 4th grade children and focusing on assessment of spinal area location and item validity.ResultsThe testing phase resulted in omission of the pain drawings and the questions and answer categories were simplified in several questions. Agreement between the questionnaire prevalence estimates and the interviews ranged between 83.7% (cervical pain today) and 97.9% (thoracic pain today). To improve the understanding of the spinal boundaries we added bony landmarks to the spinal drawings after pilot test I. This resulted in an improved sense of spinal boundary location in pilot test II. Correlations between the rFPS and the interview pain score ranged between 0.67 (cervical spine) and 0.79 (lumbar spine).ConclusionsThe Young Spine Questionnaire contains questions that assess spinal pain and its consequences. The items have been tested for content understanding and agreement between questionnaire scores and interview findings among target respondents. These preliminary results suggest that the YSQ is feasible, has content validity and is a well understood questionnaire to be used in studies of children aged 9 to 11 years.

Project description:BackgroundThere is limited data available on the use of orthoses across varying elective spine surgeries. When previously studied in 2009, inconsistent lumbar postoperative bracing practices were reported. The present study aimed to provide a ten-year update regarding postoperative bracing practices after elective lumbar surgery among United States (U.S.) spine surgeons.MethodsA questionnaire was distributed to attendees of the Lumbar Spine Research Society Annual Meeting (April 2019). The questionnaire collected demographic information, and asked surgeons to identify if they used orthoses postoperatively after ten elective lumbar surgeries. Information regarding type of brace, duration of use, and reason for bracing was also collected. Chi-square tests and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were used for comparisons.ResultsSeventy-three of 88 U.S. attending surgeons completed the questionnaire (response rate: 83%). The majority of respondents were orthopaedic surgery-trained (78%), fellowship-trained (84%), and academic surgeons (73%). The majority of respondents (60%) did not use orthoses after any lumbar surgery. Among the surgeons who braced, the overall bracing frequency was 26%. This rate was significantly lower than that reported in the literature ten years earlier (p<0.0001). Respondents tended to use orthoses most often after stand-alone lateral interbody fusions (43%) (p<0.0001). The average bracing frequency after lumbar fusions (34%) was higher than the average bracing frequency after non-fusion surgeries (16%) (p<0.0001). The most frequently utilized brace was an off the shelf lumbar sacral orthosis (66%), and most surgeons braced patients to improve pain (42%). Of surgeons who braced, most commonly did so for 2-4 months (57%).ConclusionMost surgeon respondents did not prescribe orthoses after varying elective lumbar surgeries, and the frequency overall was lower than a similar study conducted in 2009. There continues to be inconsistencies in postoperative bracing practices. In an era striving for evidence-based practices, this is an area needing more attention.