Predicting Persistent Back Symptoms by Psychosocial Risk Factors: Validity Criteria for the ÖMPSQ and the HKF-R 10 in Germany

E Riewe, E Neubauer, A C Pfeifer and M Schiltenwolf

PLOS ONE, 2016, vol. 11, issue 7, 1-14

Abstract: Objective: 10% of all individuals in Germany develop persistent symptoms due to nonspecific back pain (NSBP) causing up to 90% of direct and indirect expenses for health care systems. Evidence indicates a strong relationship between chronic nonspecific back pain and psychosocial risk factors. The Örebro Musculoskeletal Pain Screening Questionnaire (ÖMPSQ) and the German Heidelberger Kurzfragebogen Rückenschmerz (HKF-R 10) are deemed valid in prediction of persistent pain, functional loss or amount of sick leave. This study provides and discusses validity criteria for these questionnaires using ROC-curve analyses. Quality measurements included sensitivity and specificity, likelihood-ratio related test-efficiencies and clinical utility in regard to predictive values. Methods: 265 patients recruited from primary and secondary care units completed both questionnaires during the same timeframe. From the total, 133 patients returned a 6-month follow-up questionnaire to assess the validity criteria for outcomes of pain, function and sick leave. Results: Based on heterogeneous cut-offs for the ÖMPSQ, sensitivity and specificity were moderate for outcome of pain (72%/75%). Very high sensitivity was observed for function (97%/57%) and high specificity for sick leave (63%/85%). The latter also applied to the HKF-R 10 (pain 50%/84%). Proportions between sensitivity and specificity were unbalanced except for the ÖMPSQ outcome of pain. Likelihood-ratios and positive predictive values ranged from low to moderate. Conclusion: Although the ÖMPSQ may be considered useful in identification of long-term functional loss or pain, over- and underestimation of patients at risk of chronic noncspecific back pain led to limited test-efficiencies and clinical utility for both questionnaires. Further studies are required to quantify the predictive validity of both questionnaires in Germany.

Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0158850 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 58850&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0158850

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0158850

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone (plosone@plos.org).