Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Patients' Preference of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) Test or Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) Before and After Surgery for Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease


Joswig, Holger; Stienen, Martin N; Smoll, Nicolas R; Corniola, Marco V; Chau, Ivan; Schaller, Karl; Hildebrandt, Gerhard; Gautschi, Oliver P (2017). Patients' Preference of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) Test or Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) Before and After Surgery for Lumbar Degenerative Disc Disease. World Neurosurgery, 99(March):26-30.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, as a measure of objective functional impairment in lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD), complements patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of subjective functional impairment. METHODS Prospective two-center study on consecutive patients scheduled for surgical treatment for lumbar DDD who underwent an objective (TUG test) and subjective (PROMs) functional assessment before, as well as one and three days after surgery. PROMs included the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Roland-Morris Disability Index (RMDI), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Euro-Qol (EQ-5D) and Short Form (SF)-12 questionnaires. Upon completion of each assessment, patients were asked whether they would prefer performing the TUG test or completing the PROMs questionnaires. RESULTS A total of n=109/125 patients (87.2%) completed the assessments. Preoperatively, patients were 2.18 times as likely to prefer the TUG test to the PROMs (OR 2.18, 95%CI 1.27 - 3.75). On postoperative days one and three, patients were 5.79 (OR 5.79, 95%CI 3.23 - 10.37) and 6.33 times as likely to prefer the TUG test to the PROMs, respectively (OR 6.33, 95%CI 3.51 - 11.41). There were no statistical differences in baseline characteristics, TUG t-scores, VAS, RMDI, ODI, SF-12 and EQ-5D index between patients preferring either the TUG test or the PROMs questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS The TUG test is preferred over a battery of PROMs by 60-70% of patients with lumbar DDD not only in the preoperative, but also in the postoperative setting. High functional disability does not result in avoidance of the TUG test and repeated assessments lead to higher preference.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, as a measure of objective functional impairment in lumbar degenerative disc disease (DDD), complements patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of subjective functional impairment. METHODS Prospective two-center study on consecutive patients scheduled for surgical treatment for lumbar DDD who underwent an objective (TUG test) and subjective (PROMs) functional assessment before, as well as one and three days after surgery. PROMs included the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Roland-Morris Disability Index (RMDI), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Euro-Qol (EQ-5D) and Short Form (SF)-12 questionnaires. Upon completion of each assessment, patients were asked whether they would prefer performing the TUG test or completing the PROMs questionnaires. RESULTS A total of n=109/125 patients (87.2%) completed the assessments. Preoperatively, patients were 2.18 times as likely to prefer the TUG test to the PROMs (OR 2.18, 95%CI 1.27 - 3.75). On postoperative days one and three, patients were 5.79 (OR 5.79, 95%CI 3.23 - 10.37) and 6.33 times as likely to prefer the TUG test to the PROMs, respectively (OR 6.33, 95%CI 3.51 - 11.41). There were no statistical differences in baseline characteristics, TUG t-scores, VAS, RMDI, ODI, SF-12 and EQ-5D index between patients preferring either the TUG test or the PROMs questionnaires. CONCLUSIONS The TUG test is preferred over a battery of PROMs by 60-70% of patients with lumbar DDD not only in the preoperative, but also in the postoperative setting. High functional disability does not result in avoidance of the TUG test and repeated assessments lead to higher preference.

Statistics

Altmetrics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > University Hospital Zurich > Clinic for Neurosurgery
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Language:English
Date:29 November 2017
Deposited On:02 Feb 2017 08:40
Last Modified:28 Mar 2017 10:27
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:1878-8750
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2016.11.039
PubMed ID:27913260

Download

Full text not available from this repository.
View at publisher