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.
Options
BORIS DOI
Official URL
Publisher DOI
PubMed ID
35476321
Description
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.
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.
Date of Publication
2022-09
Publication Type
Article
Subject(s)
600 - Technology::610 - Medicine & health
300 - Social sciences, sociology & anthropology::360 - Social problems & social services
100 - Philosophy::150 - Psychology
300 - Social sciences, sociology & anthropology
Keyword(s)
AIS Factor analysis Language versions Patient-reported outcome SRS-22
Language(s)
en
Contributor(s)
Mannion, A F | |
Fekete, T F | |
Harding, I J | |
Monticone, M | |
Obid, P | |
Niemeyer, T | |
Liljenqvist, U | |
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 | |
Bagó, J |
Additional Credits
Institut für Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (ISPM)
Institut für Psychologie, Abt. Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie
Series
Spine deformity
Publisher
Springer
ISSN
2212-134X
Access(Rights)
open.access