The aim of this study was to develop and evaluate machine-learning-based computerized adaptive tests (CATs) for the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), and the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and its subscales. We developed CAT algorithms for the OHS, OKS, OSS, overall OES, and each of the OES subscales, using responses to the full-length questionnaires and a machine-learning technique called regression tree learning. The algorithms were evaluated through a series of simulation studies, in which they aimed to predict respondents’ full-length questionnaire scores from only a selection of their item responses. In each case, the total number of items used by the CAT algorithm was recorded and CAT scores were compared to full-length questionnaire scores by mean, SD, score distribution plots, Pearson’s correlation coefficient, intraclass correlation (ICC), and the Bland-Altman method. Differences between CAT scores and full-length questionnaire scores were contextualized through comparison to the instruments’ minimal clinically important difference (MCID).Aims
Methods
The objective of this study was to explore dimensionality of
the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and examine whether self-reported pain
and functioning can be distinguished in the form of subscales. This was a secondary data analysis of the UK NHS hospital episode
statistics/patient-reported outcome measures dataset containing
pre-operative OHS scores on 97 487 patients who were undergoing
hip replacement surgery. Objective
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:
The Manchester–Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) is a validated
16-item, patient-reported outcome measure for evaluating outcomes
of foot or ankle surgery. The original development of the instrument
identified three domains. This present study examined whether the
three domains could legitimately be summed to provide a single summary
index score. The MOXFQ and Short-Form (SF)-36 were administered to 671 patients
before surgery of the foot or ankle. Data from the three domains
of the MOXFQ (pain, walking/standing and social interaction) were
subjected to higher order factor analysis. Reliability and validity
of the summary index score was assessed.Objectives
Methods
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.
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.
