Shorter and sweeter: the 16-item version of the SRS questionnaire shows better structural validity than the 20-item version in young patients with spinal deformity.

Mannion, A F; Elfering, A; Fekete, T F; Harding, I J; Monticone, M; Obid, P; Niemeyer, T; Liljenqvist, U; Boss, A; Zimmermann, L; Vila-Casademunt, A; Sánchez Pérez-Grueso, F J; Pizones, J; Pellisé, F; Richner-Wunderlin, S; Kleinstück, F S; Obeid, I; Boissiere, L; Alanay, A and Bagó, J (2022). Shorter and sweeter: the 16-item version of the SRS questionnaire shows better structural validity than the 20-item version in young patients with spinal deformity. Spine deformity, 10(5), pp. 1055-1062. Springer 10.1007/s43390-022-00509-5

[img]
Preview
Text
Mannion_SpineDeform_2022_AAM.pdf - Accepted Version
Available under License Publisher holds Copyright.

Download (334kB) | Preview
[img] Text
Mannion_SpineDeform_2022.pdf - Published Version
Restricted to registered users only
Available under License Publisher holds Copyright.

Download (664kB)
Official URL: https://rdcu.be/cOeue

PURPOSE

In patients with adult spinal deformity, it was previously shown that 16 of the non-management items of the SRS-instrument showed a better fit to the theoretical four-factor model (pain, function, self-image, mental health) than did all 20 items. Whether the same phenomenon is observed in data from younger (< 20y) patients, for whom the questionnaire was originally designed, is not currently known.

METHODS

Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate the factor structure of the 20 non-management items of the SRS-instrument completed by 3618 young patients with spinal deformity (75.5% female; mean age, 15.0 ± 2.0 years) and of its equivalence across language versions (2713 English-speaking, 270 Spanish, 264 German, 223 Italian, and 148 French). The root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and comparative fit index (CFI) indicated model fit.

RESULTS

Compared with the 20-item version, the 16-item solution significantly increased the fit (p < 0.001) across all language versions, to achieve good model fit (CFI = 0.96, RMSEA = 0.06). For both 16-item and 20-item models, equivalence across languages was not reached, with some items showing weaker item-loading for some languages, in particular German and French.

CONCLUSION

In patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, the shorter 16-item version showed a better fit to the intended 4-factor structure of the SRS-instrument. The wording of some of the items, and/or their equivalence across language versions, may need to be addressed. Questionnaire completion can be a burden for patients; if a shorter, more structurally valid version is available, its use should be encouraged.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Pre-clinic Human Medicine > Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM)
07 Faculty of Human Sciences > Institute of Psychology > Work and Organisational Psychology

UniBE Contributor:

Elfering, Achim, Boss, Andreas

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology > 360 Social problems & social services
100 Philosophy > 150 Psychology
300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology

ISSN:

2212-134X

Publisher:

Springer

Language:

English

Submitter:

Pubmed Import

Date Deposited:

28 Apr 2022 10:28

Last Modified:

29 Apr 2023 00:25

Publisher DOI:

10.1007/s43390-022-00509-5

PubMed ID:

35476321

Uncontrolled Keywords:

AIS Factor analysis Language versions Patient-reported outcome SRS-22

BORIS DOI:

10.48350/169577

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/169577

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback