Original Articles| Volume 22, ISSUE 8, P503-510, October 1999

Download started.


The Bournemouth Questionnaire: A short-form comprehensive outcome measure. I. Psychometric properties in back pain patients


      Objective: Develop and test a short-form comprehensive outcome measure for back pain. Design: Prospective longitudinal study of 3 consecutive cohorts of back pain patients. Setting: Anglo-European College of Chiropractic outpatient clinic and several field chiropractic practices. Method: Domains judged important in the back pain model and responsive to clinical change were identified from the literature. Items were scored on an 11-point numerical rating scale. The instrument was psychometrically tested by use of those tests relevant to an evaluative measure. Results: Seven dimensions of the back pain model were included in the questionnaire. Having established face validity, the instrument was shown to demonstrate high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.9) and good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.95). All items were retained on the basis that they contributed to the overall score (item-corrected total score correlations) and to the instrument's responsiveness to clinical change (item change-corrected total change score correlations). The instrument demonstrated acceptable construct and longitudinal construct validity with established external measures. The effect size of the instrument was high (1.29) and comparable with established measures. Conclusion: A reliable, valid, and responsive instrument has been developed for use in back pain patients. It is practical for use in investigations of both the efficacy and effectiveness of back pain treatments. (J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1999;22:503–10)


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Sackett DL
        • Haynes RB
        • Guyatt GH
        • Tugwell P
        Clinical epidemiology: a basic science for clinical medicine.
        2nd ed. Little, Brown and Co, London1991
        • Sackett DL
        • Wennberg JE
        Choosing the best research design for each question.
        BMJ. 1997; 315: 1636
        • Long AF
        • Dixon P
        Monitoring outcomes in routine practice: defining appropriate measurement criteria.
        J Eval Clin Prac. 1996; 2: 71-78
        • Hoiriis KT
        • Owens EF
        • Pfleger B
        Changes in general health status during upper cervical chiropractic care: a practice-based research project.
        Chiropractic Res J. 1997; 4: 18-25
        • Nyiendo J
        • Haas M
        • Hondras MA
        Outcomes research in chiropractic: the state of the art and recommendations for the chiropractic research agenda.
        J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1997; 20: 185-200
        • Koes BW
        • Assendelft WJJ
        • van der Heijden GJ
        • Bouter LM
        Spinal manipulation and mobilization for low back pain: an updated systematic review of randomized clinical trials.
        Spine. 1996; 21: 2860-2873
        • Waddell G
        • Feder G
        • McIntosh A
        • Lewis M
        • Hutchinson A
        Low back pain evidence review.
        Royal College of General Practitioners, London1996
        • Clinical Standards Advisory Group of the Department of Health
        Management Guidelines for Back Pain.
        HMSO, London1994
        • Bolton JE
        Future directions for outcomes research in back pain.
        Eur J Chiropractic. 1997; 45: 57-64
        • Merskey H
        The definition of pain.
        Eur J Psychiatry. 1991; 6: 153-159
        • Verhaak PFM
        • Kerssens JJ
        • Dekker J
        • Sorbi MJ
        • Bensing JM
        Prevalence of chronic bending pain disorder among adults: a review of the literature.
        Pain. 1998; 77: 231-239
        • Jensen MP
        • Karoly P
        Self-report scales and procedures for assessing pain in adults.
        in: Handbook of pain assessment. Guildford Press, London1992: 135-151
        • Melzack R
        The McGill pain questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods.
        Pain. 1975; 1: 277-299
        • Fairbank JCT
        • Couper J
        • Davies JB
        • O'Brien JP
        The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire.
        Physiotherapy. 1980; 66: 271-273
        • Roland M
        • Morris R
        A study of the natural history of back pain. Part 1. Development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low back pain.
        Spine. 1983; 8: 141-144
        • Hudson-Cook N
        • Tomes-Nicholson K
        • Breen AC
        A revised Oswestry disability questionnaire.
        in: Back pain. New approaches to rehabilitation and education. Manchester University Press, Manchester1989: 187-204
        • Ruta DA
        • Garratt AM
        • Wardlaw D
        • Russell IT
        Developing a valid and reliable measure of health outcome for patients with low back pain.
        Spine. 1994; 19: 1887-1896
        • Kopec JA
        • Esdaile JM
        • Abrahamowicz M
        • Wood-Dauphinee S
        • Lamping DL
        • Williams JI
        The Quebec back disability scale.
        Spine. 1995; 20: 341-352
        • Daltroy LH
        • Cats-Baril WL
        • Katz JN
        • Fossel AH
        • Liang MH
        The North American Spine Society lumbar spine outcome assessment instrument. Reliability and validity tests.
        Spine. 1996; 21: 741-749
        • Bolton JE
        Evaluation of treatment in back pain patients: clinical outcome measures.
        Eur J Chiropractic. 1994; 42: 29-40
        • Bolton JE
        Evaluation of the psychosocial profile of the chronic back pain patient.
        in: A professional's guide to spinal rehabilitation. Appleton & Lange, Stamford (CT)1999 (In press)
        • Bergner MB
        • Bobbitt RA
        • Carter WB
        • Gilson BS
        The SIP: development and final revision of a health status measure.
        Med Care. 1981; 19: 787-805
        • Brazier JE
        • Harper R
        • Jones NMB
        • et al.
        Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care.
        BMJ. 1992; 305: 160-164
        • Kirshner B
        • Guyatt G
        A methodological framework for assessing health indices.
        J Chron Dis. 1985; 38: 27-36
        • Streiner DL
        • Norman GR
        Health measurement scales.
        2nd ed. Oxford University Press, Oxford1995
        • Smith BH
        • Penny KI
        • Purves AM
        • et al.
        The Chronic Pain Grade questionnaire: validation and reliability in postal research.
        Pain. 1997; 71: 141-147
        • Main CJ
        • Wood PLR
        • Hollis S
        • Spanswick CC
        • Waddell G
        The distress and risk assessment method. A simple patient classification to identify distress and evaluate the risk of poor outcome.
        Spine. 1992; 17: 42-52
        • Toomey TC
        • Seville JL
        • Mann JD
        The pain locus of control scale: relationship to pain description, self-control skills and psychological symptoms.
        The Pain Clinic. 1995; 8: 315-322
        • Waddell G
        • Newton M
        • Henderson I
        • Somerville D
        • Main CJ
        A fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability.
        Pain. 1993; 52: 157-168
        • Bolton JE
        On the responsiveness of evaluative measures.
        Eur J Chiropract. 1997; 45: 5-8
        • Stratford P
        • Solomon P
        • Binkley J
        • Finch E
        • Gill C
        Sensitivity of Sickness Impact Profile items to measure change over time in a low-back pain patient group.
        Spine. 1993; 18: 1723-1727
        • Deyo RA
        • Diehr P
        • Patrick DL
        Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures.
        Controlled Clin Trials. 1991; 12: 142S-158S
        • Kaziz LE
        • Anderson JJ
        • Meenan RF
        Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status.
        Med Care. 1989; 27: S178-S189
        • Machin D
        • Campbell M
        • Fayers P
        • Pinol A
        Sample size tables for clinical studies.
        2nd ed. Blackwell Science, Cambridge (MA)1997
        • Deyo RA
        • Battie M
        • Beurskens AJHM
        • et al.
        Outcome measures for low back pain research. A proposal for standardized use.
        Spine. 1998; 23: 2003-2013
        • Waddell G
        A new clinical model for the treatment of low back pain.
        Spine. 1987; 12: 632-644
        • Meade TW
        • Dyer S
        • Browne W
        • Townsend J
        • Frank AO
        Low back pain of mechanical origin: randomized comparison of chiropractic and hospital outpatient treatment.
        BMJ. 1990; 300: 1431-1437
        • Beurskens AJ
        • deVet HC
        • Koke AJ
        • van der Heijden GJ
        • Knipschild PG
        Measuring the functional status of patients with low back pain.
        Spine. 1995; 20: 1017-1028
        • Bolton JE
        • Wilkinson RC
        Responsiveness of pain scales: a comparison of three pain intensity measures in chiropractic patients.
        J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1998; 21: 1-7
        • Jensen MP
        • Miller L
        • Fischer LD
        Assessment of pain during medical procedures: a comparison of three scales.
        Clin J Pain. 1998; 14: 343-349