The chronic low back pain is known to run an episodic course punctuated by recurrence and recovery. The use of health care services for the patients of chronic low back pain has increased over the past few decades. Furthermore, numerous therapies have been applied and investigated with questionable success of chronic low back pain. The patients of chronic low back pain are subject to different issues such as difficulty in sitting for long, walking for long distances, going upstairs, changing position while sleeping, taking rest, changing clothes, and bending down to pick something (Webb et al., 2003).Experienced coursework expert are available online.
The Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale is used for assessing the changes in patients of chronic low back pain. This measurement tool is selected because it is effective for measuring evaluative outcome in patients with chronic low back pain (Williams et al., 2001). This scale consists of 19 statements according to the ability of patients of chronic low back pain to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions related to low back pain. Moreover, it covers a wide range of aspects regarding daily routine of patients using 19 statements (Zanoli, 2005).
Description of Aberdeen Low Back Pain
According to Bjorklund, Hamberg, Heiden, and Barnekow-Bergkvist (2007), the tool, Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, has been validated for the effectiveness of the interventions implemented on the patients suffering from chronic low back pain (Björklund et al., 2007). Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale consists of 19 statements, which fulfills the criteria of the effective responses from the patients of low back pain (De-Vet et al., 2001). Moreover, the possibilities and probabilities for answering the 19 statements are in the form of numeric points, that is, from 0 to 100. The Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale is regarded as more sensitive in detecting changes in patients of low back pain with the passage of time (Gross& Battie, 2003).
According to Garratt, Moffett, and Farrin (2001), this tool has gained popularity in clinical practice due to easy usage of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale in such a way that the patients are required to tick the most appropriate sentence relevant to their condition. Krietler and Beltrutti (2007) identified that the scores are calculated by summing the points of statements provided by the patients. In other words, it can be said that the score scale from 0– 100 implies no changes to extreme changes in the patients of low back pain (Garratt et al., 2001). Furthermore, the questionnaire is simple and Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale can be completed within approximately five minutes by the patients of low back pain (Kreitler& Beltrutti, 2007). Professional essay writing help.
Why Using Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale
The use of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale has been suggested by numerous experts on the patients with chronic low back pain. Such type of suggestion is given because apart from the satisfactory measurement properties of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, it has been widely used in many studies (McCracken& Turk, 2002). According to Smeets, Vlaeyen, Hidding, Kester, Van der Heijden; and Knottnerus (2008), Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale is considered more sensitive as compared to Oswestry Disability Index in detecting changes with the passage of time for chronic low back pain
patients. Furthermore, Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale is highly valid, reliable, and responsive outcome measure for the functional disability patients with low back pain (Taimela et al., 2000). The questions used in Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale addresses the pain of patients suffering from chronic low back pain while participating in different activities such as pain with social activities outside the house, walking, going upstairs, sit to stand, dressing, lying down, turning over in bed, and food intake (Garratt et al., 2001). buy dissertation online uk.
The purpose of presenting this paper is to illustrate the assessment of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale for the patients with chronic low back pain. In order to provide assessment for Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, the paper is representing the reliability, validity, sensitivity, specificity along with the strengths and weaknesses of the tool. Furthermore, the paper is concluding by reflecting the overall summary of the assessment of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale along with certain comments on the assessment conducted in this paper.
The search strategy adopted for gathering information regarding Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale includes the usage of different databases and search engines. The most beneficial databases for gathering information includes journals and articles from National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI, Physical Therapy, WITS Institutional Repository Environment on DSpace (WIReDSpace, Physiopedia, EBSCOHost, The Spine Journal, Elsevier, and Jstor. Furthermore, some books from Google books are also used for gathering beneficial information about the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale. However, the most specific keywords used for gathering relevant information for this paper include Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, sensitivity + Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, reliability + Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, validity + Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, specificity + Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, strengths + Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, weaknesses + Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, and chronic low back pain. These key words helped so much to find relevant articles, journals, and books for completing the paper in most effective way by using the essential information. However, it was somewhat difficult to search for original Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale studies by other researchers but using these keywords in different forms helped to gain the articles and journals. Get professional assignment writers.
This paper can be concluded by stating that the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, which is more effective while different studies have evaluated psychometric properties of this measurement scale through evaluating its reliability, validity, sensitivity, specificity, strengths and weaknesses. The paper has discussed and analyzed the effectiveness of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, which is a self-administered disability change measure and found the scale as reflecting greater levels of change in disability with higher numbers on a 19 questions scale. In addition, it is also found that Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale is to yield reliable measurements, which are valid for understanding the level of disability in the patients, and to be sensitive to change over time for groups of patients with low back pain.
In order to evaluate how effective the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale is in assessing the interventions implemented on the patients with low back pain, this paper evaluated the psychometric properties of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale using previous literature while pointing out the studies supporting and rejecting the reliability, validity, sensitivity, specificity and strengths and weaknesses of the measurement scale. In respect of psychometric properties evaluation of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, it is found that different studies have come out with distinct results and this distinction is based on study context used for the evaluation. Evaluating the reliability of the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, most studies have pointed out reliability coefficient .83 to .85 while other studies have pointed out high coefficient in physical dimensions only and low coefficient in psychosocial dimensions.
The validity literature found on the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale indicated the measurement scale giving valid outcome (Frost et al., 2000). Conversely, other study that evaluated content validity and construct validity of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale found limited validity of the scale in contrast to other measurement scale(Fass et al., 1995). A comparative study evaluated the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale with ceiling effects and floor effects and determined that Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale does not possess floor effects while ceiling effects were present in the evaluation result. In terms of evaluating the sensitivity of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale, the literature has been found supporting that Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale is more sensitive in patients with low back pain than other measurement scales. In addition, Morris (2005) has observed the sensitivity of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale higher than that of six points rating scale. As far as specificity of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale is concerned, there is very little research conducted on it and there is no comparative evaluation is available on the specificity of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale. Moreover, the approaches used to measure the specificity of the scales are of three different types. Best thesis writing service
As the final comments, it can be stated that different literature are helpful in determining different psychometric properties such as reliability, validity, sensitivity, specificity and strengths and weaknesses of the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale. Great deal of contradiction has been found among studies, however, the significant effectiveness and importance of Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale cannot be ignored in terms of assessing the patients with low back pain (Wilson et al., 2009). In addition, literature have found considerable effectiveness of the scale and based on the scale, they have determined that there is lack of usefulness of the measurement scale in aiding decision making concerning individual patients (Hondras et al., 2009).
- Beurskens, A.J. et al., 1995.Measuring the Functional Status of Patients with Low Back Pain: Assessment of the Quality of Four Disease-Specific Questionnaires.Spine, 20, pp.1017-28.
- Björklund, M., Hamberg, J., Heiden, M.& Barnekow-Bergkvist, M., 2007.The assessment of symptoms and functional limitations in low back pain patients: validity and reliability of a new questionnaire.Eur Spine J., 16(11), pp.1799-811.
- Bombardier, C., Hayden, J.& Beaton, D.E., 2001. Minimal Clinically Important Difference: Low Back Pain: Outcome Measures.J. Rheumatol, 28(2), pp.431-38.
- Burton, A.K., McClune, T., Clarke, R.& Mainl, C., 2004.Long-term follow-up of patients with low back pain attending for manipulative care: outcomes and predictors.Man Ther, 9, pp.30-35.
- Costa, L. et al., 2008.Clinimetric testing of three self-report outcome measures for low back pain patients in Brazil. Which one is the best?Spine., 33, p.2459–2463.
- Costa, L.O.P. et al., 2009.Motor Control Exercise and Spinal Manipulative Therapy for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Trial.Phys Ther, 89, pp.1275-86.
- Davidson, M.& Keating, J., 2002.A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness. Physical Therapy.
- De-Vet, H.C., Bouter, L.M.& Bezemer, P.M., 2001. Reproducibility and Responsiveness of Evaluative Outcome Measures.International Journal of Technology Assessment Health Care, 17(4), pp.479-87.
- Deyo, R., 1995.Promises and Limitations of the Patient Outcome Research - back pain example. Proc Assoc Am Physicians, 107, pp.324-28.
- Dionne, C. et al., 1997.Predicting long-term functional limitations among back pain patients in primary care settingsJ Clin. Epidemiol, 50, pp.31-43.
- Farrar, J.T. et al., 2001.Clinical Importance of Changes in Chronic Pain Intensity Measured on an 11-Point Numerical Pain Rating Scale.Pain, 94(2), pp.149-58.
- Fass, A., Eljik, J.v., Chavannes, A.& Gubbels, J., 1995.A Randomized Trial of Exercise Therapy in Acute Low Back Pain.Spine, 20, pp.941-47.
- Fisher, K.& Johnston, M., 2002.Emotional distress and control cognitions as mediators of the impact of chronic pain on disability.The British Psychological Society.
- Frost, H., Lamb, S.& Shackleton, C., 2000.A Functional Restoration Programme for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Prospective Outcome Study. Physiotherapy, 86, pp.285-93.
- Garratt, A., Moffett, J.& Farrin, A., 2001.A Responsiveness of Generic and Specific Measures of Health Outcome in Low Back Pain.Spine, 26, pp.71-77.
- Gross, D.P.& Battie, M.C., 2003.Construct Validity of a Kinesio physical Functional Capacity Evaluation Administered within a Workers Compensation Environment.Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 13(4), pp.287-95.
- Hartigan, C., Rainville, J., Sobel, J.& Hipona, M., 2000.Long term exercise abherence after intensive rehabilitation for chronic low back pain. Med and Sci in Sports and Exer., 30(3), pp.551-57.
- Hodselmans, A.P. et al., 2010.DETERMINANTS OF CHANGE IN PERCEIVED DISABILITY OF PATIENTS WITH NON-SPECIFIC CHRONIC LOW BACK PAINJournal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 42(7), pp.630-35.
- Hondras, M. et al., 2009.A randomized controlled trial comparing 2 types of spinal manipulation and minimal conservative medical care for adults 55 years and older with subacute or chronic low back pain.Journal Of Manipulative And Physiological Therapeutics.
- Ijzelenberg, W.& Burdorf, A., 2004.Patterns of Care for Low Back Pain in a Working Population.Spine, 29, pp.1362-68.
- Jacob, T., Baras, M., Zeev, A.& Epstein, L., 2001.Low Back Pain: Reliability of a Set of Pain Measurement Tools. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 82(6), pp.735-42.
- Jarvik, J.G., Kallmes, D.F.& Mirza, S.K., 2003.Vertebroplasty: Learning More, But Not Enough.Spine, 28, pp.1487-89.
- Kamper, S.J. et al., 2010.How little pain and disability do patients with low back pain have to experience to feel that they have recovered? European Spine Journal, 19(9), pp.1495-501.
- Kopec, J.A.& Esdaile, J., 1995.Functional disability scales for back pain. Spine, 20, pp.228-35.
- Kopec, J., Esdaile, J.& Abrahamowicz, M., 1996.The Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: conceptualization and development.J Clin Epidemiol, p.49:151–161.
- Kreitler, S.& Beltrutti, D., 2007.The Handbook of Chronic Pain. New York: Nove Publishers.