The responsiveness of the Manchester–Oxford Foot
Questionnaire (MOXFQ) was compared with foot/ankle-specific and
generic outcome measures used to assess all surgery of the foot
and ankle. We recruited 671 consecutive adult patients awaiting
foot or ankle surgery, of whom 427 (63.6%) were female, with a mean
age of 52.8 years (18 to 89). They independently completed the MOXFQ,
Short-Form 36 (SF-36) and EuroQol (EQ-5D) questionnaires pre-operatively
and at a mean of nine months (3.8 to 14.4) post-operatively. Foot/ankle
surgeons assessed American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS)
scores corresponding to four foot/ankle regions. A transition item measured
perceived changes in foot/ankle problems post-surgery. Of 628 eligible
patients proceeding to surgery, 491 (78%) completed questionnaires
and 262 (42%) received clinical assessments both pre- and post-operatively. The
regions receiving surgery were: multiple/whole foot in eight (1.3%),
ankle/hindfoot in 292 (46.5%), mid-foot in 21 (3.3%), hallux in
196 (31.2%), and lesser toes in 111 (17.7%). Foot/ankle-specific
MOXFQ, AOFAS and EQ-5D domains produced larger effect sizes (>
0.8)
than any SF-36 domains, suggesting superior responsiveness. In analyses
that anchored change in scores and effect sizes to patients’ responses
to a transition item about their foot/ankle problems, the MOXFQ
performed well. The SF-36 and EQ-5D performed poorly. Similar analyses,
conducted within foot-region based sub-groups of patients, found
that the responsiveness of the MOXFQ was good compared with the
AOFAS. This evidence supports the MOXFQ’s suitability for assessing
all foot and ankle surgery.
Aims.
Aims.
We used prospective data from 862 total knee and 716 total hip replacements three years after surgery in order to derive and validate a reduced Western Ontario and McMasters University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) function scale. The reduced scale was derived using the advice of clinical experts as well as analysis of data. The scale was tested for validity, reliability and responsiveness. Items which were retained included: ascending stairs, rising from sitting, walking on the flat, getting in or out of a car, putting on socks, rising from bed, and sitting. The reduced and full scales had comparable, moderate correlations with other measures of function, confirming convergent validity. Cronbach’s alpha was high (α >
0.85) with the reduced scale confirming reliability.
To estimate the measurement properties for the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in patients undergoing revision knee arthroplasty (responsiveness, minimal detectable change (MDC-90), minimal important change (MIC), minimal important difference (MID), internal consistency, construct validity, and interpretability). Secondary data analysis was performed for 10,727 patients undergoing revision knee arthroplasty between 2013 to 2019 using a UK national patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) dataset. Outcome data were collected before revision and at six months postoperatively, using the OKS and EuroQol five-dimension score (EQ-5D). Measurement properties were assessed according to COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines.Aims
Methods
To validate the Sydney Hamstring Origin Rupture Evaluation (SHORE), a hamstring-specific clinical assessment tool to evaluate patient outcomes following surgical treatment. A prospective study of 70 unilateral hamstring surgical repairs, with a mean age of 47.3 years (15 to 73). Patients completed the SHORE preoperatively and at six months post-surgery, and then completed both the SHORE and Perth Hamstring Assessment Tool (PHAT) at three years post-surgery. The SHORE questionnaire was validated through the evaluation of its psychometric properties, including; internal consistency, reproducibility, reliability, sensitivity to change, and ceiling effect. Construct validity was assessed using Pearson’s correlation analysis to examine the strength of association between the SHORE and the PHAT.Aims
Methods
This study evaluates the quality of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) reported in childhood fracture trials and recommends outcome measures to assess and report physical function, functional capacity, and quality of life using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) standards. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic review of OVID Medline, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL was performed to identify all PROMs reported in trials. A search of OVID Medline, Embase, and PsycINFO was performed to identify all PROMs with validation studies in childhood fractures. Development studies were identified through hand-searching. Data extraction was undertaken by two reviewers. Study quality and risk of bias was evaluated by COSMIN guidelines and recorded on standardized checklists.Aims
Methods
The foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS) has been
evaluated for many conditions of the foot and ankle. We evaluated
its construct validity in 136 patients with osteoarthritis of the
ankle, its content validity in 37 patients and its responsiveness
in 39. Data were collected prospectively from the registry of patients
at our institution. All FAOS subscales were rated relevant by patients. The Pain,
Activities of Daily Living, and Quality of Life subscales showed
good correlation with the Physical Component score of the Short-Form-12v2.
All subscales except Symptoms were responsive to change after surgery. We concluded that the FAOS is a weak instrument for evaluating
osteoarthritis of the ankle. However, some of the FAOS subscales
have relative strengths that allow for its limited use while we
continue to seek other satisfactory outcome instruments. Cite this article:
To validate the English language Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12)
as a tool to evaluate the outcome of hip and knee arthroplasty in
a United Kingdom population. All patients undergoing surgery between January and August 2014
were eligible for inclusion. Prospective data were collected from
205 patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and 231 patients
undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Outcomes were assessed
with the FJS-12 and the Oxford Hip and Knee Scores (OHS, OKS) pre-operatively,
then at six and 12 months post-operatively. Internal consistency,
convergent validity, effect size, relative validity and ceiling
effects were determined.Aims
Patients and Methods
The primary aim of this study was to develop
a patient-reported Activity &
Participation Questionnaire (the
OKS-APQ) to supplement the Oxford knee score, in order to assess
higher levels of activity and participation. The generation of items
for the questionnaire involved interviews with 26 patients. Psychometric
analysis (exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis and Rasch
analysis) guided the reduction of items and the generation of a
scale within a prospective study of 122 relatively young patients
(mean age 61.5 years (42 to 71)) prior to knee replacement. A total
of 99, completed pre-operative and six month post-operative assessments
(new items, OKS, Short-Form 36 and American Knee Society Score). The eight-item OKS-APQ scale is unidimensional, reliable (Cronbach’s
alpha 0.85; intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) 0.79; or 0.92
when one outlier was excluded), valid (r >
0.5 with related scales)
and responsive (effect size 4.16). We recommend that it is used with the OKS with adults of all
ages when further detail regarding the levels of activity and participation
of a patient is required. Cite this article:
This study validates the short-form WOMAC function scale for assessment of conservative treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. Data were collected before treatment and six and nine months later, from 100 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee to determine the validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, floor and ceiling effects, and responsiveness of the short-form WOMAC function scale. The scale showed high correlation with the traditional WOMAC and other measures. The internal consistency was good (Cronbach α: 0.88 to 0.95) and an excellent test-retest reliability was found (Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient (ρc): 0.85 to 0.94). The responsiveness was adequate and comparable to that of the traditional WOMAC (standardised response mean 0.56 to 0.44 and effect size 0.64 to 0.57) and appeared not to be significantly affected by floor or ceiling effects (0% and 7%, respectively). The short-form WOMAC function scale is a valid, reliable and responsive alternative to the traditional WOMAC in the evaluation of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee managed conservatively. It is simple to use in daily practice and is therefore less of a burden for patients in clinical trials.
We developed a questionnaire to assess patient-reported outcome after surgery of the elbow from interviews with patients. Initially, 17 possible items with five response options were included. A prospective study of 104 patients (107 elbow operations) was carried out to analyse the underlying factor structure, dimensionality, internal and test-retest reliability, construct validity and responsiveness of the questionnaire items. This was compared with the Mayo Elbow performance score clinical scale, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, and the Short-Form (SF-36) General Health Survey. In total, five questions were considered inappropriate, which resulted in the final 12-item questionnaire, which has been referred to as the Oxford elbow score. This comprises three unidimensional domains, ‘elbow function’, ‘pain’ and ‘social-psychological’; with each domain comprising four items with good measurement properties. This new 12-item Oxford elbow score is a valid measure of the outcome of surgery of the elbow.
Accurate, reproducible outcome measures are essential
for the evaluation of any orthopaedic procedure, in both clinical
practice and research. Commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have
drawbacks such as ‘floor’ and ‘ceiling’ effects, limitations of
worldwide adaptability and an inability to distinguish pain from
function. They are also unable to measure the true outcome of an
intervention rather than a patient’s perception of that outcome. Performance-based functional outcome tools may address these
problems. It is important that both clinicians and researchers are
aware of these measures when dealing with high-demand patients,
using a new intervention or implant, or testing a new rehabilitation
protocol. This article provides an overview of some of the clinically-validated
performance-based functional outcome tools used in the assessment
of patients undergoing hip and knee surgery. Cite this article:
We have developed an illustrated questionnaire, the Hand20, comprising 20 short and easy-to-understand questions to assess disorders of the upper limb. We have examined the usefulness of this questionnaire by comparing reliability, validity, responsiveness and the level of missing data with those of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. A series of 431 patients with disorders of the upper limb completed the Hand20 and the Japanese version of the DASH (DASH-JSSH) questionnaire. The norms for Hand20 scores were determined in another cross-sectional study. Most patients had no difficulty in completing the Hand20 questionnaire, whereas the DASH-JSSH had a significantly higher rate of missing data. The standard score for the Hand20 was smaller than the reported norms for the DASH. Our study showed that the Hand20 questionnaire provided validation comparable with that of the DASH-JSSH. Explanatory illustrations and short questions which were easy-to-understand led to better rates of response and fewer missing data, even in elderly individuals with cognitive deterioration.
Although the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities
(WOMAC) osteoarthritis index was originally developed for the assessment
of non-operative treatment, it is commonly used to evaluate patients
undergoing either total hip (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR).
We assessed the importance of the 17 WOMAC function items from the perspective
of 1198 patients who underwent either THR (n = 704) or TKR (n =
494) in order to develop joint-specific short forms. After these
patients were administered the WOMAC pre-operatively and at three,
six, 12 and 24 months’ follow-up, they were asked to nominate an
item of the function scale that was most important to them. The
items chosen were significantly different between patients undergoing
THR and those undergoing TKR (p <
0.001), and there was a shift
in the priorities after surgery in both groups. Setting a threshold
for prioritised items of ≥ 5% across all follow-up, eight items
were selected for THR and seven for TKR, of which six items were
common to both. The items comprising specific WOMAC-THR and TKR
function short forms were found to be equally responsive compared
with the original WOMAC function form. Cite this article:
Orthopaedic outcome measures are used to evaluate the effect of operative interventions. They are used for audit and research. Knowledge of these measures is becoming increasingly important with league tables comparing surgeons and hospitals being made accessible to the profession and the general public. Several types of tool are available to describe outcome after hip surgery such as generic quality-of-life questionnaires, disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaires, hip-specific outcome measures and general short-term clinical measures. We provide an overview of the outcome measures commonly used to evaluate hip interventions.