Literature DB >> 15085905

A comparison of Rasch with Likert scoring to discriminate between patients' evaluations of total hip replacement surgery.

R Fitzpatrick1, J M Norquist, C Jenkinson, B C Reeves, R W Morris, D W Murray, P J Gregg.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine whether there are advantages in terms of outcome assessment of using Rasch methods of scoring the 12-item Oxford Hip Score (OHS) questionnaire over conventionally Likert scores. As part of a prospective cohort study of total hip replacements in five former regions of England the OHS was sent to patients pre-operatively, at 3 months and 1 year post-operatively. Post-operative data was collected on over 5000 cases. Based on the level of satisfaction with surgery, patients were divided into satisfied and dissatisfied. Analyses were performed to test the relative precision (RP) of Rasch scoring vs. conventionally Likert scores in discriminating the groups experiencing different level of satisfaction. Considerable gains in precision were achieved with Rasch scoring methods when groups were compared 3 and 12 months post-operatively. The results from the current study suggest that in some situations there may be substantial gains in measuring health related outcomes using Rasch-based scoring methods.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15085905     DOI: 10.1023/B:QURE.0000018489.25151.e1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Life Res        ISSN: 0962-9343            Impact factor:   4.147


  29 in total

1.  Rasch analysis of the hierarchical assessment of balance and mobility (HABAM).

Authors:  C MacKnight; K Rockwood
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century.

Authors:  R D Hays; L S Morales; S P Reise
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  Rasch analysis of the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) Mastery Test.

Authors:  C V Granger; A Deutsch; R T Linn
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 3.966

4.  Observations are always ordinal; measurements, however, must be interval.

Authors:  B D Wright; J M Linacre
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 3.966

5.  Measuring pretest-posttest change with a Rasch Rating Scale Model.

Authors:  E W Wolfe; C W Chiu
Journal:  J Outcome Meas       Date:  1999

6.  Overview: maintaining outcomes for total hip arthroplasty. The past, present, and future.

Authors:  M A Ritter; M J Albohm
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1997-11       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  The value of short and simple measures to assess outcomes for patients of total hip replacement surgery.

Authors:  R Fitzpatrick; R Morris; S Hajat; B Reeves; D W Murray; D Hannen; M Rigge; O Williams; P Gregg
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  2000-09

8.  Measurement of patient perceptions of pain and disability in relation to total hip replacement: the place of the Oxford hip score in mixed methods.

Authors:  R McMurray; J Heaton; P Sloper; S Nettleton
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1999-12

9.  Randomised controlled trial comparing hospital at home care with inpatient hospital care. I: three month follow up of health outcomes.

Authors:  S Shepperd; D Harwood; C Jenkinson; A Gray; M Vessey; P Morgan
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-06-13

10.  Measuring the success of treatment in patient terms.

Authors:  K B Bayley; M R London; G L Grunkemeier; D J Lansky
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1995-04       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  9 in total

1.  Development and validation of the activity significance personal evaluation (ASPEn) scale.

Authors:  Trudy Mallinson; Stacey L Schepens Niemiec; Mike Carlson; Natalie Leland; Cheryl Vigen; Jeanine Blanchard; Florence Clark
Journal:  Aust Occup Ther J       Date:  2014-10-04       Impact factor: 1.856

2.  Nonparametric IRT analysis of Quality-of-Life Scales and its application to the World Health Organization Quality-of-Life Scale (WHOQOL-Bref).

Authors:  Klaas Sijtsma; Wilco H M Emons; Samantha Bouwmeester; Ivan Nyklícek; Leo D Roorda
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2008-02-02       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Combined use of remifentanil and propofol to limit patient movement during retinal detachment surgery under local anesthesia.

Authors:  Abdul Kader M Mahfouz; Ashraf M Ghali
Journal:  Saudi J Anaesth       Date:  2010-09

4.  Randomized trial of superficial peribulbar compared with conventional peribulbar anesthesia for cataract extraction.

Authors:  Abdul Kader M Mahfouz; Hassan M Al Katheri
Journal:  Clin Ophthalmol       Date:  2007-03

5.  DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy: a Rasch analysis.

Authors:  A A Jolijn Hendriks; Sarah C Smith; Theopisti Chrysanthaki; Stefan J Cano; Nick Black
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2017-08-22       Impact factor: 3.186

6.  The assessment of procedural skills in physiotherapy education: a measurement study using the Rasch model.

Authors:  Karl Martin Sattelmayer; Kavi C Jagadamma; Franziska Sattelmayer; Roger Hilfiker; Gillian Baer
Journal:  Arch Physiother       Date:  2020-05-25

7.  Rasch analysis of the long-term conditions questionnaire (LTCQ) and development of a short-form (LTCQ-8).

Authors:  Laurie Batchelder; Diane Fox; Caroline M Potter; Michele Peters; Karen Jones; Julien E Forder; Ray Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2020-11-30       Impact factor: 3.186

8.  Use of computerised adaptive testing to reduce the number of items in patient-reported hip and knee outcome scores: an analysis of the NHS England National Patient-Reported Outcome Measures programme.

Authors:  Jonathan Peter Evans; Christopher Gibbons; Andrew D Toms; Jose Maria Valderas
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-07-20       Impact factor: 3.006

9.  Using the bootstrap to establish statistical significance for relative validity comparisons among patient-reported outcome measures.

Authors:  Nina Deng; Jeroan J Allison; Hua Julia Fang; Arlene S Ash; John E Ware
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2013-05-31       Impact factor: 3.186

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.