Advertisement

Quality of Life Research

, Volume 18, Issue 4, pp 473–481 | Cite as

Rasch analysis of 24-, 18- and 11-item versions of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire

  • Megan Davidson
Article

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to examine fit of the original 24-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and three short-form versions to a Rasch model with particular attention to targeting of item difficulty and to differential item functioning.

Methods

Cross-sectional survey of 140 people with low back pain seeking physiotherapy treatment. Data were analysed using a dichotomous Rasch model.

Results

All versions showed adequate overall data fit to the Rasch model, with few misfitting items. Person separation was around 0.85 for all versions. Item 5 (use a handrail to get upstairs) showed differential item functioning by age. Targeting of persons of high ability was poor and short-form versions also had poor targeting of persons of low ability. Items of similar difficulty clustered in the centre of the logit scale.

Conclusion

Although the Roland data fit the Rasch model, there were insufficient items of higher difficulty to sufficiently evaluate disability in persons with mild disability. Short-form versions also lacked items of lower difficulty.

Keywords

Rasch analysis Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire Low back pain Questionnaires Health status 

References

  1. 1.
    Grotle, M., Brox, J. I., & Vollestad, N. K. (2005). Functional status and disability questionnaires: What do they assess? A systematic review of back-specific outcome questionnaires. Spine, 30(1), 130–140. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000163888.19478.49.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roland, M., & Morris, R. (1983). A study of the natural history of back pain. Part i: Development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine, 8(2), 141–144. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198303000-00004.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Haigh, R., Tennant, A., Biering, S. F., Grimby, G., Marincek, C., Phillips, S., et al. (2001). The use of outcome measures in physical medicine and rehabilitation within Europe. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 33(6), 273–278. doi: 10.1080/165019701753236464.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Torenbeek, M., Caulfield, B., Garrett, M., & Van Harten, W. (2001). Current use of outcome measures for stroke and low back pain rehabilitation in five European countries: First results of the across project. International Journal of Rehabilitation Research. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Rehabilitationsforschung. Revue Internationale de Recherches de Readaptation, 24(2), 95–101. doi: 10.1097/00004356-200106000-00002.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bergner, M., Bobbitt, R. A., Carter, W. B., & Gilson, B. S. (1981). The sickness impact profile: Development and final revision of a health status measure. Medical Care, 19(8), 787–805. doi: 10.1097/00005650-198108000-00001.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Patrick, D. L., Deyo, R. A., Atlas, S. J., Singer, D. E., Chapin, A., & Keller, R. B. (1995). Assessing health-related quality of life in patients with sciatica. Spine, 20(17), 1899–1908. discussion 1909. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199509000-00011.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Davidson, M., & Keating, J. L. (2002). A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: Reliability and responsiveness. Physical Therapy, 82(1), 8–24.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Underwood, M. R., Barnett, A. G., & Vickers, M. R. (1999). Evaluation of two time-specific back pain outcome measures. Spine, 24(11), 1104–1112. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199906010-00010.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stratford, P. W., Binkley, J., Solomon, P., Finch, E., Gill, C., & Moreland, J. (1996). Defining the minimum level of detectable change for the Roland-Morris Questionnaire. Physical Therapy, 76(4), 359–365. discussion 366–358.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ostelo, R. W. J. G., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2005). Clinically important outcomes in low back pain. Best Practice & Research. Clinical Rheumatology, 19(4), 593–607. doi: 10.1016/j.berh.2005.03.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stratford, P. W., Binkley, J. M., Riddle, D. L., & Guyatt, G. H. (1998). Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: Part 1. Physical Therapy, 78(11), 1186–1196.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stratford, P. W., & Binkley, J. M. (1997). Measurement properties of the rm-18. A modified version of the Roland-Morris Disability Scale. Spine, 22(20), 2416–2421. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199710150-00018.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Williams, R. M., & Myers, A. M. (2001). Support for a shortened Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for patients with acute low back pain. Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada, 53(1), 60–66.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stroud, M. W., McKnight, P. E., & Jensen, M. P. (2004). Assessment of self-reported physical activity in patients with chronic pain: Development of an abbreviated Roland-Morris Disability Scale. Journal of Pain, 5(5), 257–263. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2004.04.002.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Atlas, S. J., Deyo, R. A., van den Ancker, M., Singer, D. E., Keller, R. B., & Patrick, D. L. (2003). The Maine-Seattle Back Questionnaire: A 12-item disability questionnaire for evaluating patients with lumbar sciatica or stenosis: Results of a derivation and validation cohort analysis. Spine, 28(16), 1869–1876. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000083205.82614.01.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cook, K. F., Choi, S. W., Crane, P. K., Deyo, R. A., Johnson, K. L., & Amtmann, D. (2008). Letting the cat out of the bag: Comparing computer adaptive tests and an 11-item short form of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. Spine, 33(12), 1378–1383. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181732acb.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pengel, L. H., Refshauge, K. M., & Maher, C. G. (2004). Responsiveness of pain, disability, and physical impairment outcomes in patients with low back pain. Spine, 29(8), 879–883. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200404150-00011.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ostelo, R. W., de Vet, H. C., Knol, D. L., & van den Brandt, P. A. (2004). 24-item Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire was preferred out of six functional status questionnaires for post-lumbar disc surgery. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 57(3), 268–276. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.09.005.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Garratt, A. M., In collaboration with the United Kingdom Back Pain Excercise and Manipulation Trial (2003). Rasch analysis of the Roland Disability Questionnaire. Spine, 28(1), 79–84. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200301010-00019.
  20. 20.
    Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danmarks Paedogogiske Institute.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Küçükdeveci, A. A., Tennant, A., Elhan, A. H., & Niyazoglu, H. (2001). Validation of the Turkish version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for use in low back pain. Spine, 26(24), 2738–2743. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200112150-00024.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Stucki, G., Daltroy, L., Katz, J. N., Johannesson, M., & Liang, M. H. (1996). Interpretation of change scores in ordinal clinical scales and health status measures: The whole may not equal the sum of the parts. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49(7), 711–717. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(96)00016-9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Linacre, J. M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7(4), 328.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wolfe, E. W., & Smith, E. V. (2007). Instrument development tools and activities for measure validation using Rasch models: Part II—validation activities. Journal of Applied Measurement, 8(2), 204–234.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wright, B. D. (1996). Reliabilty and separation. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 9(4), 472.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (1995). Health measurement scales. A practical guide to their development and use (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tennant, A., & Pallant, J. F. (2006). Unidimensionality matters! (a tale to two smiths?). Rasch Measurement Transactions, 20(1), 1048–1051.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Smith, R. M., Schumacker, R. E., & Bush, M. J. (1998). Using item mean squares to evaluate fit to the Rasch model. Journal of Outcome Measurement, 2(1), 66–78.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.La Trobe UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations