Literature DB >> 18512725

Findings of extensive variation in the types of outcome measures used in hip and knee replacement clinical trials: a systematic review.

Daniel L Riddle1, Paul W Stratford, Dixie H Bowman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe the extent of variation in outcome measure usage in hip and knee replacement randomized trial literature, and to summarize this variation in the context of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) conceptual model created by the World Health Organization (WHO).
METHODS: We used a defined search strategy in Medline and EMBase databases to identify articles published from January 2000 to February 2007. Studies were reviewed if they were randomized trials with a >or=6-week followup and if they used noninvasive outcome measures of impaired joint function or whole-person limitations in daily activities or functional status. The WHO ICF model was used to categorize outcome measures.
RESULTS: Of 972 studies, 160 were included for review. Of these, 82 were conducted on patients with hip replacements, 75 on patients with knee replacements, and 3 on patients with both. The most common outcome measure in knee trials was the American Knee Society score (used in 48% of reviewed studies), and in hip trials was the Harris hip score (52.4%). At least 20 different outcome measures were used in the hip trials, and at least 14 different measures were used in knee trials. The primary outcome was identified in only 24% of trials.
CONCLUSION: We found extensive variation in outcome measures across trials and saw inconsistency across the components of the WHO ICF model. To improve interpretability, future work should determine whether consensus can be developed for a standardized set of outcome measures for hip and knee replacement trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18512725     DOI: 10.1002/art.23706

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arthritis Rheum        ISSN: 0004-3591


  27 in total

1.  Responsiveness and Minimally Important Differences for 4 Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Short Forms: Physical Function, Pain Interference, Depression, and Anxiety in Knee Osteoarthritis.

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

2.  A survey of physiotherapists' experience using outcome measures in total hip and knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  C McAuley; M D Westby; A Hoens; D Troughton; R Field; M Duggan; W D Reid
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 1.037

Review 3.  Challenges with health-related quality of life assessment in arthroplasty patients: problems and solutions.

Authors:  Jasvinder Singh; Jeff A Sloan; Norman A Johanson
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.020

4.  Primary total hip arthroplasty: health related quality of life outcomes.

Authors:  Ivan Bagarić; Helena Sarac; Josip Anđelo Borovac; Tonko Vlak; Josip Bekavac; Andrija Hebrang
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Can Original Knee Society Scores Be Used to Estimate New 2011 Knee Society Scores?

Authors:  Susan M Odum; Thomas K Fehring
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Variation in outcome measures in hip and knee arthroplasty clinical trials: a proposed approach to achieving consensus.

Authors:  Daniel L Riddle; Paul W Stratford; Jasvinder A Singh; C Vibeke Strand
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 4.666

7.  Commonalities, differences, and challenges with patient-derived outcome measurement tools: function/activity scales.

Authors:  Philip C Noble; Maureen Dwyer; Adam Brekke
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Assessing function in patients undergoing joint replacement: a study protocol for a cohort study.

Authors:  Vikki Wylde; Ashley W Blom; Stijn Bolink; Luke Brunton; Paul Dieppe; Rachael Gooberman-Hill; Bernd Grimm; Cindy Mann; Erik Lenguerrand
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2012-11-13       Impact factor: 2.362

9.  Persistent pain after total knee or hip arthroplasty: differential study of prevalence, nature, and impact.

Authors:  Patrícia R Pinto; Teresa McIntyre; Ramón Ferrero; Vera Araújo-Soares; Armando Almeida
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2013-09-11       Impact factor: 3.133

10.  Responsiveness differences in outcome instruments after revision hip arthroplasty: what are the implications?

Authors:  Jasvinder A Singh
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2011-05-23       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.