Is there value in routine administration of outcome questionnaires?

Abstract

Study design: Retrospective case-series of prospective routinely collected Short Form 36v2 (SF-36v2) data in an outpatient spine clinic.

Objective: To determine if there is value in routine administration of outcome questionnaires for the patient and/or clinician without a targeted population or monitoring of follow-up.

Method: Retrospective review of Health Outcomes Scoring database.

Results: During an 18-month period 1,863 patients completed 3,124 SF-36v2 questionnaires. The extent of diagnoses and the uneven timing of follow-ups of the completed questionnaires render this data useless both to the patient and for aggregate analysis.

Conclusion: There is no value in routine administration of outcome questionnaires to patient care or clinical research.

Final class of evidence-prognosis
Study design
RCT
Cohort
Case control
Case series	•
Methods
Patients at similar point in course of treatment
F/U ≥ 85%
Similarity of treatment protocols for patient groups	•
Patients followed up long enough for outcomes to occur	•
Control for extraneous risk factors	NA
Overall class of evidence	IV
The definiton of the different classes of evidence is available on page 63.

• References

• 1 Deyo RA, Patrick DL. Barriers to the use of health status measures in clinical investigation, patient care, and policy research. Med Care 1989; 27 (3) S254-S268
• 2 Quality Metric Health Outcomes Scoring Software 3.0. Copyright 2004–2009
• 3 Mirza SK, Campbell B, Ching RP , et al. Influence of comorbid medical conditions on pretreatment. J Surg Outcomes 1998; 1 (1) 31-40
• 4 Chapman JR, Norvell DC, Hermsmeyer JT , et al. Evaluating common outcomes for measuring treatment success for chronic low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011; 36 (21) (Suppl): S54-68