There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) has become one of the principal condition-specific outcome measures used in the management of spinal disorders. This review is based on publications using the ODI identified from the authors' personal databases, the Science Citation Index, and hand searches of Spine and current textbooks of spinal disorders. To review the versions of this instrument, document methods by which it has been validated, collate data from scores found in normal and back pain populations, provide curves for power calculations in studies using the ODI, and maintain the ODI as a gold standard outcome measure. It has now been 20 years since its original publication. More than 200 citations exist in the Science Citation Index. The authors have a large correspondence file relating to the ODI, that is cited in most of the large textbooks related to spinal disorders. All the published versions of the questionnaire were identified. A systematic review of this literature was made. The various reports of validation were collated and related to a version. Four versions of the ODI are available in English and nine in other languages. Some published versions contain misprints, and many omit the scoring system. At least 114 studies contain usable data. These data provide both validation and standards for other users and indicate the power of the instrument for detecting change in sample populations. The ODI remains a valid and vigorous measure and has been a worthwhile outcome measure. The process of using the ODI is reviewed and should be the subject of further research. The receiver operating characteristics should be explored in a population with higher self-report disabilities. The behavior of the instrument is incompletely understood, particularly in sensitivity to real change.

Related collections

Most cited references 9

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Randomised comparison of chiropractic and hospital outpatient management for low back pain: results from extended follow up.

M Dyer, Richard W. Browne, Ryan D. Frank … (1995)

To compare the effectiveness over three years of chiropractic and hospital outpatient management for low back pain. Randomised allocation of patients to chiropractic or hospital outpatient management. Chiropractic clinics and hospital outpatient departments within reasonable travelling distance of each other in 11 centres. 741 men and women aged 18-64 years with low back pain in whom manipulation was not contraindicated. Change in total Oswestry questionnaire score and in score for pain and patient satisfaction with allocated treatment. According to total Oswestry scores improvement in all patients at three years was about 29% more in those treated by chiropractors than in those treated by the hospitals. The beneficial effect of chiropractic on pain was particularly clear. Those treated by chiropractors had more further treatments for back pain after the completion of trial treatment. Among both those initially referred from chiropractors and from hospitals more rated chiropractic helpful at three years than hospital management. At three years the results confirm the findings of an earlier report that when chiropractic or hospital therapists treat patients with low back pain as they would in day to day practice those treated by chiropractic derive more benefit and long term satisfaction than those treated by hospitals.