dc.contributor.author | Solberg, Tore | |
dc.contributor.author | Sørlie, Andreas | |
dc.contributor.author | Sjåvik, Kristin | |
dc.contributor.author | Nygaard, Øystein Petter | |
dc.contributor.author | Ingebrigtsen, Tor | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2012-03-14T08:59:17Z | |
dc.date.available | 2012-03-14T08:59:17Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2011 | |
dc.description.abstract | Loss to follow-up may bias the outcome assessments of clinical registries. In this study, we wanted to determine whether outcomes were different in responding and non-responding patients who were included in a clinical spine surgery registry, at two years of follow-up. In addition, we wanted to identify risk factors for failure to respond.
633 patients who were operated for degenerative
disorders of the lumbar spine were followed for 2 years using a local clinical spine registry. Those who did not attend the clinic and those who did not answer a postal questionnaire—for whom
2 years of outcome data were missing—and who would be lost to follow-up according to the standard procedures of the registry protocols, were defined as non-respondents. They were traced and interviewed by telephone. Outcome measures were: improvement in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D), leg pain, and back pain; and also general state of health, employment status, and perceived benefits of the operation.
We found no statistically significant differences in outcome between respondents (78% of the patients) and nonrespondents (22%). Receipt of postal questionnaires (not being summoned for a follow-up visit) was the strongest risk factor for
failure to respond. Forgetfulness appeared to be an important cause. Older patients and those who had complications were more likely to respond.
Interpretation A loss to follow-up of 22% would not bias conclusions about overall treatment effects and, importantly, there were no indications of worse outcomes in non-respondents. | en |
dc.description | This paper is part of Tore Solberg's doctoral thesis, available in Munin at <a href=http://hdl.handle.net/10037/5733>http://hdl.handle.net/10037/5733</a> | |
dc.identifier.citation | Acta Orthopaedica 82(2011) nr. 1 s. 56-63 | en |
dc.identifier.cristinID | FRIDAID 829921 | |
dc.identifier.doi | doi: 10.3109/17453674.2010.548024 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1745-3674 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10037/3955 | |
dc.identifier.urn | URN:NBN:no-uit_munin_3677 | |
dc.language.iso | eng | en |
dc.publisher | Taylor & Francis | en |
dc.rights.accessRights | openAccess | |
dc.subject | VDP::Medical disciplines: 700::Health sciences: 800::Community medicine, Social medicine: 801 | en |
dc.subject | VDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Helsefag: 800::Samfunnsmedisin, sosialmedisin: 801 | en |
dc.subject | VDP::Medical disciplines: 700::Health sciences: 800::Health service and health administration research: 806 | en |
dc.subject | VDP::Medisinske Fag: 700::Helsefag: 800::Helsetjeneste- og helseadministrasjonsforskning: 806 | en |
dc.title | Would loss to follow-up bias the outcome evaluation of patients operated for degenerative disorders of the lumbar spine? | en |
dc.type | Journal article | en |
dc.type | Tidsskriftartikkel | en |
dc.type | Peer reviewed | en |