Literature DB >> 17905602

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the French version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in knee osteoarthritis patients.

P Ornetti1, S Parratte, L Gossec, C Tavernier, J-N Argenson, E M Roos, F Guillemin, J F Maillefert.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To adapt the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) into French and to evaluate the psychometric properties of this new version.
METHODS: The French version of the KOOS was developed according to cross-cultural guidelines by using the "translation-back translation" method to ensure content validity. KOOS data were then obtained in patients with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (OA). The translated questionnaire was evaluated in two knee OA population groups, one with no indication for joint replacement (medicine), and the other waiting for joint replacement (surgery). The psychometric properties evaluated were feasibility: percentage of responses, floor and ceiling effects; construct validity: internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha, correlations with osteoarthritis knee and hip quality of life domains using Spearman's rank test, and known group comparison between medicine and surgery groups; reliability: intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland and Altman representation; responsiveness using data obtained prior to and 3 months after surgery: standardized response mean (SRM), and effect size.
RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were included in the medicine group (68% women, mean age=70+/-10 years) and 30 in the surgery group (73% women, mean age=71+/-10 years). The percentage of responses was excellent. Neither a floor nor a ceiling effect was observed, except for the sport and recreation subscale (20.6% of patients with the worst possible score in the medicine group, 40 and 0% in the surgery group prior to and after surgery, respectively). Results for internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.76 to 0.93), and convergent and divergent construct validity were satisfactory. The patients waiting for knee surgery presented with significantly lower scores in all KOOS domains. The reproducibility of measurements of all KOOS subscales was good to excellent, with ICC ranging from 0.755 to 0.914. The responsiveness was high, with SRM ranging from 0.89 to 1.93, and effect size from 1.31 to 2.8.
CONCLUSION: The French version of KOOS is a valid, reliable, and responsive instrument to capture specific aspects of functional disability affecting quality of life of knee OA patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17905602     DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2007.08.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage        ISSN: 1063-4584            Impact factor:   6.576


  41 in total

1.  Validity and Responsiveness of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score: A Comparative Study Among Total Knee Replacement Patients.

Authors:  Barbara Gandek; John E Ware
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2017-05-08       Impact factor: 4.794

2.  Fixation augmentation using calcium-phosphate bone substitute improves outcomes of complex tibial plateau fractures. A matched, cohort study.

Authors:  Matthieu Ollivier; Yassine Bulaïd; Christophe Jacquet; Sebastien Pesenti; Jean-Noel Argenson; Sebastien Parratte
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-04-07       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Saudi Arabic version of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS).

Authors:  Saud A Alfadhel; Vishal Vennu; Ali H Alnahdi; Mohammed T Omar; Saeed H Alasmari; Zahra AlJafri; Saad M Bindawas
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 2.631

4.  Long-term results with a lateral unicondylar replacement.

Authors:  Jean-Noël A Argenson; Sebastien Parratte; Antoine Bertani; Xavier Flecher; Jean-Manuel Aubaniac
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-06-24       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Power training in patients with knee osteoarthritis: a pilot study on feasibility and efficacy.

Authors:  Denis Pelletier; Cédric Gingras-Hill; Patrick Boissy
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.037

6.  No long-term difference between fixed and mobile medial unicompartmental arthroplasty.

Authors:  Sebastien Parratte; Vanessa Pauly; Jean-Manuel Aubaniac; Jean-Noel A Argenson
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Validity and reliability of the SPORTS score.

Authors:  Davide Blonna; Filippo Castoldi; Davide Delicio; Matteo Bruzzone; Federico Dettoni; Davide Edoardo Bonasia; Roberto Rossi
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2011-07-20       Impact factor: 4.342

8.  Fifteen-year survival of the Cedior™ total knee prosthesis.

Authors:  Roger Erivan; Edouard Fadlallah; Guillaume Villatte; Aurélien Mulliez; Stéphane Descamps; Stéphane Boisgard
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2019-07-06

9.  Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the French version of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI) scale.

Authors:  Y Bohu; S Klouche; N Lefevre; K Webster; S Herman
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-03-28       Impact factor: 4.342

10.  Return to sports after valgus osteotomy of the knee joint in patients with medial unicompartmental osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Dominique Saragaglia; René-Christofer Rouchy; Ali Krayan; Ramsay Refaie
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-07-04       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.