Importance of patient-reported individualized goals when assessing outcomes for adult spinal deformity (ASD): initial experience with a Patient Generated Index (PGI).
Date
2017-10
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Repository Usage Stats
views
downloads
Citation Stats
Attention Stats
Abstract
Background context
Current metrics to assess patients' health-related quality of life (HRQOL) may not reflect a true change in the patients' specific perception of what is most important to them.Purpose
This study aimed to describe the initial experience of a Patient Generated Index (PGI) in which patients create their own outcome domains.Study design
This is a single-center prospective study.Patient sample
Patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) comprise the study sample.Outcome measures
Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short Form-36 (SF-36 Physical Component Score [PCS] and Mental Component Score [MCS]), Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r), and PGI.Methods
Oswestry Disability Index, SF-36, SRS-22r, and PGI were administered preoperatively and postoperatively at 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and 1 and 2 years. PGI correlations with ODI, SF-36, SRS total score, free-text frequency analysis of PGI exact response with text in ODI and SRS-22r questionnaires, and the responsiveness (effect size [ES]) of the HRQOL metrics were analyzed. No funding was used for this study and there are no conflicts of interest.Results
A total of 59 patients with 209 clinical encounters produced 370 PGI written response topics that included affect or emotions, relationships, activities of daily life, personal care, work, and hobbies. Mean preoperative PGI score was 18.6±13.5 (0-71.7 out of 100 [best]), and mean scores significantly improved at every postoperative time point (p<.05). Preoperative PGI scores significantly correlated with preoperative ODI (r=-0.28, p=.03), MCS (r=0.48, p<.01), and SRS total (r=0.57, p<.01). Postoperative PGI scores correlated with all HRQOL measures (p<.0001): ODI (r=-0.65), PCS (r=0.50), MCS (r=0.55), and SRS total (r=0.63). PGI responses exactly matched ODI and SRS-22r text at 47.8% and 35.4%, respectively, and at 63.2% and 58.9%, respectively, for categories. Patient Generated Index ES at a minimum of 1-year follow-up was -2.39, indicating substantial responsiveness (|ES|>0.8). Effect sizes for ODI, SRS-22r total, SF-36 PCS, and SF-36 MCS were 2.16, -2.06, -2.05, and -0.80, respectively.Conclusions
The PGI is easy to administer and offers additional information about the patients' perspective not captured in standard HRQOL metrics. Patient Generated Index scores correlated with all of the standard HRQOL scores and were more responsive than ODI, SF-36, and SRS-22r, suggesting that the PGI may be a step closer to one HRQOL measure that better encompasses concerns and goals of the individual patients.Type
Department
Description
Provenance
Subjects
Citation
Permalink
Published Version (Please cite this version)
Publication Info
Scheer, Justin K, Malla Keefe, Virginie Lafage, Michael P Kelly, Shay Bess, Douglas C Burton, Robert A Hart, Amit Jain, et al. (2017). Importance of patient-reported individualized goals when assessing outcomes for adult spinal deformity (ASD): initial experience with a Patient Generated Index (PGI). The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society, 17(10). pp. 1397–1405. 10.1016/j.spinee.2017.04.013 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/28369.
This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
Scholars@Duke

Christopher Ignatius Shaffrey
I have more than 25 years of experience treating patients of all ages with spinal disorders. I have had an interest in the management of spinal disorders since starting my medical education. I performed residencies in both orthopaedic surgery and neurosurgery to gain a comprehensive understanding of the entire range of spinal disorders. My goal has been to find innovative ways to manage the range of spinal conditions, straightforward to complex. I have a focus on managing patients with complex spinal disorders. My patient evaluation and management philosophy is to provide engaged, compassionate care that focuses on providing the simplest and least aggressive treatment option for a particular condition. In many cases, non-operative treatment options exist to improve a patient’s symptoms. I have been actively engaged in clinical research to find the best ways to manage spinal disorders in order to achieve better results with fewer complications.
Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.