Aghayev Emin, Elfering Achim, Schizas Constantin, Mannion Anne F
Institute for Evaluative Research in Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Bern, Stauffacherstrasse 78, CH-3014 Bern, Switzerland.
Department of Work and Organizational Psychology, Institute for Psychology, University of Bern, Uni Tobler, Muesmattstrasse 45, CH-3009 Bern, Switzerland.
Spine J. 2014 Jun 1;14(6):916-24. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.07.446. Epub 2013 Nov 5.
Studies involving factor analysis (FA) of the items in the North American Spine Society (NASS) outcome assessment instrument have revealed inconsistent factor structures for the individual items.
This study examined whether the factor structure of the NASS varied in relation to the severity of the back/neck problem and differed from that originally recommended by the developers of the questionnaire, by analyzing data before and after surgery in a large series of patients undergoing lumbar or cervical disc arthroplasty.
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Prospective multicenter observational case series.
Three hundred ninety-one patients with low back pain and 553 patients with neck pain completed questionnaires preoperatively and again at 3 to 6 and 12 months follow-ups (FUs), in connection with the SWISSspine disc arthroplasty registry.
North American Spine Society outcome assessment instrument.
First, an exploratory FA without a priori assumptions and subsequently a confirmatory FA were performed on the 17 items of the NASS-lumbar and 19 items of the NASS-cervical collected at each assessment time point. The item-loading invariance was tested in the German version of the questionnaire for baseline and FU.
Both NASS-lumbar and NASS-cervical factor structures differed between baseline and postoperative data sets. The confirmatory analysis and item-loading invariance showed better fit for a three-factor (3F) structure for NASS-lumbar, containing items on "disability," "back pain," and "radiating pain, numbness, and weakness (leg/foot)" and for a 5F structure for NASS-cervical including disability, "neck pain," "radiating pain and numbness (arm/hand)," "weakness (arm/hand)," and "motor deficit (legs)."
The best-fitting factor structure at both baseline and FU was selected for both the lumbar- and cervical-NASS questionnaires. It differed from that proposed by the originators of the NASS instruments. Although the NASS questionnaire represents a valid outcome measure for degenerative spine diseases, it is able to distinguish among all major symptom domains (factors) in patients undergoing lumbar and cervical disc arthroplasty; overall, the item structure could be improved. Any potential revision of the NASS should consider its factorial structure; factorial invariance over time should be aimed for, to allow for more precise interpretations of treatment success.
对北美脊柱协会(NASS)结果评估工具中的项目进行因素分析(FA)的研究表明,各个项目的因素结构不一致。
本研究通过分析大量接受腰椎或颈椎间盘置换术患者手术前后的数据,探讨NASS的因素结构是否因腰/颈问题的严重程度而异,以及是否与问卷开发者最初推荐的结构不同。
研究设计/地点:前瞻性多中心观察性病例系列。
391例腰痛患者和553例颈痛患者在术前以及与SWISSspine椎间盘置换术登记相关的3至6个月和12个月随访时完成问卷。
北美脊柱协会结果评估工具。
首先,对在每个评估时间点收集的NASS腰椎部分的17个项目和NASS颈椎部分的19个项目进行无先验假设的探索性因素分析,随后进行验证性因素分析。在问卷的德文版中对基线和随访时的项目负荷不变性进行测试。
NASS腰椎和颈椎的因素结构在基线和术后数据集之间均存在差异。验证性分析和项目负荷不变性表明,NASS腰椎的三因素(3F)结构拟合更好,该结构包含“残疾”、“背痛”以及“放射性疼痛、麻木和无力(腿/脚)”方面的项目;NASS颈椎的五因素(5F)结构拟合更好,包括残疾、“颈痛”、“放射性疼痛和麻木(手臂/手)”、“无力(手臂/手)”以及“运动功能障碍(腿部)”。
为腰椎和颈椎NASS问卷选择了在基线和随访时拟合最佳的因素结构。它与NASS工具的发起者提出的结构不同。虽然NASS问卷是退行性脊柱疾病的有效结果测量工具,但它能够区分接受腰椎和颈椎间盘置换术患者的所有主要症状领域(因素);总体而言,项目结构可以改进。NASS的任何潜在修订都应考虑其因素结构;应致力于实现随时间的因素不变性,以便更精确地解释治疗效果。