Introduction. The heterogeneity of outcomes used in the field of lower limb lengthening surgery (LLLS) affects our ability to synthesize evidence. This hampers robust systematic reviews and treatment recommendations for clinical practice. Ultimately this reduces the impact of research for both patients and healthcare professionals. This scoping review aimed to describe the outcomes and outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) used within the field of LLLS. Method. A systematic literature search of WOS, Scopus, Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library identified all studies reporting outcomes in children and adults after LLLS. All outcomes and OMIs were extracted verbatim. An iterative process was used to group outcome terms under standardized outcome headings categorized using the COMET Taxonomy of Outcomes. Result. Data saturation was achieved in 2020. A total of 142 studies were included between 2024-2020, reporting 2964 verbatim outcomes with 663 standardized outcome terms collapsed into 119 outcome headings (subdomains). A total of 29 patient-reported and 26 clinician-reported outcome instruments were identified. The most commonly reported outcome was “Lengthening amount”, reported in over 72% of the included studies, while “health-related quality of life” was measured in 16% and all life impact outcomes were reported in 19% of the included studies. Conclusion. A large number of peer-reviewed publications are available, demonstrating that significant resources are being devoted to research on LLLS. However, reported outcomes for people with LLLS are heterogeneous, subject to reporting bias, and vary widely in the definitions and measurement tools used to collect them. Outcomes likely to be important to patients, such as quality of life and measures of physical function, have been neglected. This scoping review identifies a need to standardize outcomes and outcome measures reported on patients recovering from lower limb lengthening surgery; this can be addressed by creating a core set of outcomes

Abstract. Background. The Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) is a 12-item patient reported outcome measurement instrument. It was developed with classical test theory, without testing assumptions such as unidimensionality (all items reflect one underlying factor), appropriate weighting of each item, no differential item function (DIF, different groups answer the same way), and monotonicity (people with higher function have higher score). We applied item response theory (IRT) to improve the validity of FJS to contemporary standards to optimise it for ongoing use. Research Questions. Does the FJS reflect one latent trait? Can an IRT model be fitted to the FJS to provide interval-scaled measurement?. Methodology. Participants undergoing primary total knee replacement provided pre-operative and post-operative (6-months) responses for FJS. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and Mokken analysis were conducted. The data were fitted to a graded response model (GRM). Results. 1288 response patterns were analysed. EFA showed a one factor model (all 12 items load to one underlying trait). CFA demonstrated excellent model fit (X2 <0.001, Tucker Lewis Index=0.96, Comparative Fit Index=0.96). Items did not have equal weighting. The FJS demonstrated good monotonicity with no differential item functioning by sex, age, or body mass index. Conclusions. The FJS meets key validity assumptions supporting its use in clinical practice and research. The IRT-adapted FJS provides continuous measurements with greater granularity including individual measurement error. This adapted score has advantages over traditional FJS scoring, being interval scaled (using GRM) and can be retrospectively applied to existing response sets

Aims. A core outcome set for adult, open lower limb fracture has been established consisting of ‘Walking, gait and mobility’, ‘Being able to return to life roles’, ‘Pain or discomfort’, and ‘Quality of life’. This study aims to identify which outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) should be recommended to measure each core outcome. Methods. A systematic review and quality assessment were conducted to identify existing instruments with evidence of good measurement properties in the open lower limb fracture population for each core outcome. Additionally, shortlisting criteria were developed to identify suitable instruments not validated in the target population. Candidate instruments were presented, discussed, and voted on at a consensus meeting of key stakeholders. Results. The Wales Lower Limb Trauma Recovery scale was identified, demonstrating validation evidence in the target population. In addition, ten candidate OMIs met the shortlisting criteria. Six patients, eight healthcare professionals, and 11 research methodologists attended the consensus meeting. Consensus was achieved for the EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and the Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) to measure ‘Quality of life’ and ‘Walking, gait and mobility’ in future research trials, audit, and clinical assessment, respectively. No instrument met consensus criteria to measure ‘Being able to return to life roles’ and ‘Pain or discomfort’. However, the EQ-5D-5L was found to demonstrate good face validity and could also be used pragmatically to measure these two outcomes, accepting limitations in sensitivity. Conclusion. This study recommends the LEFS and EQ-5D-5L to measure the core outcome set for adult open lower limb fracture. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(6):352–361

Aims. Open lower limb fracture is a life-changing injury affecting 11.5 per 100,000 adults each year, and causes significant morbidity and resource demand on trauma infrastructures. This study aims to identify what, and how, outcomes have been reported for people following open lower limb fracture over ten years. Methods. Systematic literature searches identified all clinical studies reporting outcomes for adults following open lower limb fracture between January 2009 and July 2019. All outcomes and outcome measurement instruments were extracted verbatim. An iterative process was used to group outcome terms under standardized outcome headings categorized using an outcome taxonomy. Results. A total of 532 eligible studies were identified, reporting 1,803 outcomes with 786 unique outcome terms, which collapsed to 82 standardized outcome headings. Overall 479 individual outcome measurement instruments were identified, including 298 outcome definitions, 27 patient- and 18 clinician-reported outcome measures, and six physical performance measures. The most-reported outcome was ‘bone union/healing’ reported in over 50% of included studies, while health-related quality of life was only measured in 6% of included studies. Conclusion. Outcomes reported for people recovering from open lower limb fracture are heterogeneous, liable to outcome reporting bias, and vary widely in the definitions and the measurement tools used to collect them. Outcomes likely to be important to patients, such as quality of life and measures of physical functioning, have been neglected. This systematic review identifies the need to unify outcome measures reported on patients recovering from open lower limb fracture; this may be addressed by creating a core outcome set. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(2):138–146

Aims

Cauda equina syndrome (CES) can be associated with chronic severe lower back pain and long-term autonomic dysfunction. This study assesses the recently defined core outcome set for CES in a cohort of patients using validated questionnaires.

Objectives

This review aims to summarize the outcomes used to describe effectiveness of treatments for paediatric wrist fractures within existing literature.

Objectives

The Oxford hip score (OHS) is a 12-item questionnaire designed and developed to assess function and pain from the perspective of patients who are undergoing total hip replacement (THR). The OHS has been shown to be consistent, reliable, valid and sensitive to clinical change following THR. It has been translated into different languages, but no adequately translated, adapted and validated Danish language version exists.