Measurement Properties of the Modified Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS): Is It Reliable and Valid in Workers with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain?
Maurizio Alen Trippolini, Svenja Janssen, Roger Hilfiker and 1 others
PMID 28756479WHAT IT FOUND
In 62 workers with chronic musculoskeletal pain, the 20-item Modified Spinal Function Sort stayed similar over at least 2 days and related to the original 50-item version, pain disability, pain and lifting tests.
It gives a brief picture-based estimate of perceived work capacity.
Key findings
01When 62 patients repeated the 20-item Modified Spinal Function Sort at least 2 days after the first test, their scores changed by 1.7 points on average on the 0 to 80 scale.
02The M-SFS score was related to the original Spinal Function Sort (0.89), pain disability (-0.49), current pain (-0.37) and lifting tests (0.43, 0.46 and 0.52).
03The four planned checks of relationships were not rejected, but the items formed four components and the walking item loaded across components.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The sample was small and limited to German-speaking patients in two Swiss inpatient work rehabilitation centres, so the results may not apply to other languages, settings or patients. There was no follow-up after rehabilitation, so the study did not test whether the M-SFS predicts return to work. The proposed M-SFS score below 56 as a possible marker of non-return to work is a hypothesis from comparison with the original SFS, not a result tested in this study. The factor structure was based on 62 patients, and the authors say larger samples are needed before treating the four components as settled. The study did not test responsiveness, so a change in M-SFS score after therapy should not be assumed to show improvement.
Declared interests
The supplied metadata lists non-U.S. government research support. The article text does not report a commercial funder, sponsor role or author conflict declaration.
The easy way to misread this
Do not use the M-SFS as proof that a low score predicts failure to return to work or that a change in score shows treatment effect. The study did not follow patients after rehabilitation and only compared two measurements taken at least 2 days apart.