title: A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of this study was to examine 5 commonly used questionnaires for assessing disability in people with low back pain. The modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale, the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, the Waddell Disability Index, and the physical health scales of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) were compared in patients undergoing physical therapy for low back pain.
  
  
  METHODS
  Patients with low back pain completed the questionnaires during initial consultation with a physical therapist and again 6 weeks later (n=106). Test-retest reliability was examined for a group of 47 subjects who were classified as "unchanged" and a subgroup of 16 subjects who were self-rated as "about the same." Responsiveness was compared using standardized response means, receiver operating characteristic curves, and the proportions of subjects who changed by at least as much as the minimum detectable change (MDC) (90% confidence interval [CI] of the standard error for repeated measures). Scale width was judged as adequate if no more than 15% of the subjects had initial scores at the upper or lower end of the scale that were insufficient to allow change to be reliably detected.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Intraclass correlation coefficients (2,1) calculated to measure reliability for the subjects who were classified as "unchanged" and those who were self-rated as "about the same" were greater than.80 for the Oswestry and Quebec questionnaires and the SF-36 Physical Functioning scale and less than.80 for the Waddell and Roland-Morris questionnaires and the SF-36 Role Limitations-Physical and Bodily Pain scales. None of the scales were more responsive than any other.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Measurements obtained with the modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, the SF-36 Physical Functioning scale, and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale were the most reliable and had sufficient width scale to reliably detect improvement or worsening in most subjects. The reliability of measurements obtained with the Waddell Disability Index was moderate, but the scale appeared to be insufficient to recommend it for clinical application. The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Role Limitations-Physical and Bodily Pain scales of the SF-36 appeared to lack sufficient reliability and scale width for clinical application.
authors.affiliation: School of Physiotherapy, La Trobe University, Bundoora, 3053, Melbourne, Australia. M.Davidson@latrobe.edu.au
authors.forename: Megan
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Davidson
authors.forename: Jennifer L
authors.initials: JL
authors.lastname: Keating
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D004185:Disability Evaluation; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D017116:Low Back Pain / Q000503:physiopathology*; D008297:Male; D011446:Prospective Studies; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D011795:Surveys and Questionnaires / Q000592:standards*