RESEARCH ARTICLE


Development and Initial Validation of the Satisfaction and Recovery Index (SRI) for Measurement of Recovery from Musculoskeletal Trauma



David M Walton*, 1, Joy C MacDermid 2, 3, Mathew Pulickal 1, Amber Rollack 1, Jennifer Veitch 1
1 School of Physical Therapy, Western University, London Ontario, Canada
2 School of Physical Therapy, McMaster University, Hamilton Ontario, Canada
3 Clinical Research Lab, Hand and Upper Limb Centre, St. Joseph’s Hospital, London Ontario, Canada


Article Metrics

CrossRef Citations:
0
Total Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 1885
Abstract HTML Views: 953
PDF Downloads: 228
Total Views/Downloads: 3066
Unique Statistics:

Full-Text HTML Views: 966
Abstract HTML Views: 528
PDF Downloads: 156
Total Views/Downloads: 1650



© Walton et al.; Licensee Bentham Open.

open-access license: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/) which permits unrestrictive use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

* Address correspondence to this author at the School of Physical Therapy Rm. EC1443, Western University, 1201 Western Rd., London, ON N6G 1H1, Canada; Tel: +1-519-661-2111, Ext. 80145; Fax: +1-519-661-3866; E-mail: dwalton5@uwo.ca


Abstract

Background:

There is a need for a generic patient-reported outcome (PRO) that is patient-centric and offers sound properties for measuring the process and state of recovery from musculoskeletal trauma. This study describes the construction and initial validation of a new tool for this purpose.

Methods:

A prototype tool was constructed through input of academic and clinical experts and patient representatives. After evaluation of individual items, a 9-item Satisfaction and Recovery Index (SRI) was subject to psychometric evaluation drawn from classical test theory. Subjects were recruited through online and clinical populations, from those reporting pain or disability from musculoskeletal trauma. The full sample (N = 129) completed the prototype tool and a corresponding region-specific disability measure. A subsample (N = 46) also completed the Short-Form 12 version 2 (SF12vs). Of that, a second subsample (N = 29) repeated all measures 3 months later.

Results:

A single factor ‘health-related satisfaction’ was extracted that explained 71.1% of scale variance, Cronbach’s alpha = 0.95. A priori hypotheses for cross-sectional correlations with region-specific disability measures and the generic Short-form 12 component scores were supported. The SRI tool was equally responsive to change, and able to discriminate between recovered/non-recovered subjects, at a level similar to that of the region-specific measures and generally better than the SF-12 subscales.

Conclusion:

The new SRI tool, as a measure of health-related satisfaction, shows promise in this initial evaluation of its properties. It is generic, patient-centered, and shows overall measurement properties similar to that of region-specific measures while allowing the potential benefit of comparison between clinical conditions. Despite early promising results, additional properties need to be explored before the tool can be endorsed for routine clinical use.

Keywords: Patient-reported outcomes, psychometrics, recovery, responsiveness, validity..