These data provide both validation and st and ards for other users and indicate the power of the instrument for detecting change in sample population s. CONCLUSIONS The  ODI  remains a valid and vigorous measure and has been a worthwhile outcome measure .
The behavior of the instrument is incompletely understood , particularly in sensitivity to real change
STUDY DESIGN 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 data bases , the Science Citation Index , and h and search es of Spine and current textbooks of spinal disorders .
OBJECTIVES To review the versions of this instrument , document methods by which it has been vali date d , collate data from scores found in normal and back pain population s , provide curves for power calculations in studies using the ODI , and maintain the ODI as a gold st and ard outcome measure .
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA It has now been 20 years since its original publication .
More than 200 citations exist in the Science Citation Index .
Prospective, Multicenter Study of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Relief of Chronic Back and Extremity Pain
Study Design This prospect i ve , multicenter study was design ed to investigate the efficacy and outcome of spinal cord stimulation using a variety of clinical and psychosocial outcome measures . Data were collected before implantation and at regular intervals after implantation . This report focuses on 70 patients who had undergone 1 year of follow‐up treatment at the time of data analysis . Objectives To provide a more generalizable assessment of long‐term spinal cord stimulation outcome by comparing a variety of pain and functional/ quality ‐of‐life measures before and after management . This report details results after 1 year of stimulation . Summary of Background Data The historically diverse methods , patient selection criteria , and outcome measures reported in the spinal cord stimulation literature have made interpretation and comparison of results difficult . Although short‐term outcomes are generally consistent , long‐term outcomes of spinal cord stimulation , as determined by prospect i ve studies that assess multidimensional aspects of the pain complaint among a relatively homogeneous population , are not well established . Methods Two hundred nineteen patients were entered at six centers throughout the United States . All patients underwent a trial of stimulation before implant of the permanent system .  Most were psychologically screened . One hundred eighty‐two patients were implanted with a permanent stimulating system .  At the time of this report , complete 1‐year follow‐up data were available on 70 patients , 86 % of whom reported pain in the back or lower extremities . Patient evaluation of pain and functional levels was completed before implantation and 3 , 6 , 12 , and 24 months after implantation . Complications , medication usage , and work status also were monitored . Results All pain and quality ‐of‐life measures showed statistically significant improvement during the treatment year . These included the average pain visual analogue scale , the McGill Pain Question naire , the Oswestry Disability Question naire , the Sickness Impact Profile , and the Beck Depression Inventory . Overall success of the therapy was defined as at least 50 % pain relief and patient assessment of the procedure as fully or partially beneficial and worthwhile . Using this definition , spinal cord stimulation successfully managed pain in 55 % of patients on whom 1‐year follow‐up is available . Complications requiring surgical intervention were reported by 17 % ( 12 of 70 ) of patients . Medication usage and work status were not changed significantly . Conclusions This prospect i ve , multicenter study confirms that spinal cord stimulation can be an effective therapy for management of chronic low back and extremity pain . Significant improvements in many aspects of the pain condition were measured , and complications were minimal
These data provide both validation and st and ards for other users and indicate the power of the instrument for detecting change in sample population s. CONCLUSIONS The  ODI  remains a valid and vigorous measure and has been a worthwhile outcome measure .
The behavior of the instrument is incompletely understood , particularly in sensitivity to real change
STUDY DESIGN 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 data bases , the Science Citation Index , and h and search es of Spine and current textbooks of spinal disorders .
OBJECTIVES To review the versions of this instrument , document methods by which it has been vali date d , collate data from scores found in normal and back pain population s , provide curves for power calculations in studies using the ODI , and maintain the ODI as a gold st and ard outcome measure .
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA It has now been 20 years since its original publication .
More than 200 citations exist in the Science Citation Index .