Questionnaires for the subjective evaluation of patients with fibromyalgia: a systematic review.
Elio Carrasco-Vega, Marta Martínez-Moya, Luca Barni and 3 others
PMID 37184415WHAT IT FOUND
Sixteen fibromyalgia questionnaires varied widely in length, cost, and what they measure.
The validation quality scores ranged from 2 to 9 out of 10, and few reported how much change matters or how much error they had.
Key findings
01Twenty-two studies containing sixteen different questionnaires were included, and these questionnaires subjectively assessed various aspects of fibromyalgia.
02The included questionnaires received quality scores from 2 to 9 out of 10; FHAQ scored 2, FibroFatigue Scale scored 3, and FSQ, ICAF and VASFIQ scored 4, the only ones not exceeding 5.
03Only seven of the sixteen questionnaires reported a factor component analysis, and only the FIQ reported the smallest change that matters, at 14%.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
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 search was limited to the listed databases and languages, so relevant validation studies could have been missed. Many psychometric data were missing: only 6 studies reported completion time, only 7 questionnaires reported factor component analysis, only 3 reported measurement error, and only 1 reported minimal clinically important difference. No gold standard for subjective fibromyalgia evaluation was identified, and the questionnaires measured different variables, so one tool may not fit every clinic.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflict of interest with any financial organization regarding the material discussed in the manuscript.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this as evidence that any questionnaire improves fibromyalgia outcomes. It only compares how well the questionnaires were tested, and many questionnaires lacked data on measurement error and clinically important change.