C B Terwee1, L B Mokkink, M P M Steultjens, J Dekker. 1. EMGO Institute, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands. cb.terwee@vumc.nl
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the measurement properties (i.e. internal consistency, reproducibility, validity, responsiveness and interpretability) of all performance-based methods which have been used to measure the physical function of patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO and Embase. Standardized criteria were applied to assess the quality of the clinimetric studies and the measurement properties. RESULTS: Twenty-six performance-based methods were included: 13 walking tests, two stair-climb tests, one chair test and ten multi-item tests. Three out of seven multi-activity tests were tested for internal consistency and two were rated positively. Fourteen tests were tested for reliability and five were rated positively. The absolute measurement error (agreement) was assessed for 10 tests. Only one test received a positive rating. Fourteen tests were tested for construct validity. Only two tests received positive ratings. Responsiveness was assessed for 12 tests, but none of them received a positive rating. A lot of indeterminate ratings were given, mostly for small studies or non-optimal analyses. CONCLUSION: Many more well-designed studies are needed to assess the measurement properties of performance-based methods. More importantly, however, before one can make a justified choice of a particular performance-based method, consensus is needed on what activities should be included in a performance-based test for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis and which aspects of function should be measured.
OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the measurement properties (i.e. internal consistency, reproducibility, validity, responsiveness and interpretability) of all performance-based methods which have been used to measure the physical function of patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in Medline, CINAHL, PsychINFO and Embase. Standardized criteria were applied to assess the quality of the clinimetric studies and the measurement properties. RESULTS: Twenty-six performance-based methods were included: 13 walking tests, two stair-climb tests, one chair test and ten multi-item tests. Three out of seven multi-activity tests were tested for internal consistency and two were rated positively. Fourteen tests were tested for reliability and five were rated positively. The absolute measurement error (agreement) was assessed for 10 tests. Only one test received a positive rating. Fourteen tests were tested for construct validity. Only two tests received positive ratings. Responsiveness was assessed for 12 tests, but none of them received a positive rating. A lot of indeterminate ratings were given, mostly for small studies or non-optimal analyses. CONCLUSION: Many more well-designed studies are needed to assess the measurement properties of performance-based methods. More importantly, however, before one can make a justified choice of a particular performance-based method, consensus is needed on what activities should be included in a performance-based test for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis and which aspects of function should be measured.
Authors: Lidwine B Mokkink; Caroline B Terwee; Paul W Stratford; Jordi Alonso; Donald L Patrick; Ingrid Riphagen; Dirk L Knol; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2009-02-24 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Augustine C Lee; Jeffrey B Driban; Lori Lyn Price; William F Harvey; Angie Mae Rodday; Chenchen Wang Journal: J Pain Date: 2017-05-10 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: Marta Gonzalez Sáenz de Tejada; Antonio Escobar; Michael Herdman; Carmen Herrera; Lidia García; Cristina Sarasqueta Journal: Clin Rheumatol Date: 2011-09-24 Impact factor: 2.980
Authors: Pankaj Jogi; Sandi J Spaulding; Aleksandra A Zecevic; Tom J Overend; John F Kramer Journal: Physiother Can Date: 2011-01-20 Impact factor: 1.037
Authors: Poliane T S Lage; Luciana A C Machado; Sandhi M Barreto; Roberta C de Figueiredo; Rosa W Telles Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2019-12-19 Impact factor: 2.631
Authors: Gregory M Freisinger; Erin E Hutter; Jacqueline Lewis; Jeffrey F Granger; Andrew H Glassman; Matthew D Beal; Xueliang Pan; Laura C Schmitt; Robert A Siston; Ajit M W Chaudhari Journal: J Orthop Res Date: 2016-10-04 Impact factor: 3.494