Literature DB >> 19885744

The Oxford Ankle Foot Questionnaire for children: responsiveness and longitudinal validity.

Christopher Morris1, Helen Doll, Neville Davies, Andrew Wainwright, Tim Theologis, Keith Willett, Ray Fitzpatrick.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate how scores from the Oxford Ankle Foot Questionnaire change over time and with treatment using both distribution-based and anchor-based approaches.
METHODS: Eighty children aged 5-16 and their parent or career completed questionnaires at orthopaedic or trauma outpatient clinics. They were asked to complete and return a second set of questionnaires again within 2 weeks (retest), and then mailed a third set of questionnaires to complete again after 2 months (follow-up). The follow-up questionnaires included a global rating of change 'transition' item.
RESULTS: Child- and parent-reported mean domain scores (Physical, School & Play, and Emotional) were all stable at retest, whereas positive mean changes were observed at follow-up. As we hypothesised, trauma patients had poorer scores than elective patients at baseline, and showed greater improvement at follow-up. For trauma patients, mean changes in per cent scores were large (scores improved between 40 and 56 for the Physical and School & Play domains, and 17 and 21 for Emotional); all effect sizes (ES) were large (>0.8). For elective patients, the mean improvement in per cent scores were more moderate (Physical: child 10, ES = 0.4, parent 11, ES = 0.5; School & Play child 0, ES = 0, parent 9 ES = 0.4; Emotional: child 6, ES = 0.2; parents 8, ES > 0.3). Minimal detectable change (MDC(90)), an indication of measurement error, ranged from 6 to 8. Half the standard deviation of baseline scores ranged from 11 to 18. Minimal important difference could only be calculated for elective patients (9 child and 13 parent ratings), these ranged from 7 to 17.
CONCLUSIONS: The findings support the responsiveness and longitudinal validity of the scales. Changes in domain scores of, or exceeding, the MDC(90) (6-8) are likely to be beyond measurement error; further work is required to refine the estimate of change that can be considered important.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19885744     DOI: 10.1007/s11136-009-9550-7

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


  15 in total

1.  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

2.  Measuring health status: what are the necessary measurement properties?

Authors:  G H Guyatt; B Kirshner; R Jaeschke
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1992-12       Impact factor: 6.437

3.  Interpreting change scores of tests and measures used in physical therapy.

Authors:  Stephen M Haley; Maria A Fragala-Pinkham
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2006-05

Review 4.  Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes.

Authors:  Dennis Revicki; Ron D Hays; David Cella; Jeff Sloan
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 5.  Item response theory and clinical measurement.

Authors:  Steven P Reise; Niels G Waller
Journal:  Annu Rev Clin Psychol       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 18.561

6.  Measurement properties of the activities scale for kids.

Authors:  N L Young; J I Williams; K K Yoshida; J G Wright
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  The mathematical relationship among different forms of responsiveness coefficients.

Authors:  G R Norman; Kathleen W Wyrwich; Donald L Patrick
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-03-10       Impact factor: 3.440

8.  Responsiveness and minimal important differences for patient reported outcomes.

Authors:  Dennis A Revicki; David Cella; Ron D Hays; Jeff A Sloan; William R Lenderking; Neil K Aaronson
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2006-09-27       Impact factor: 3.186

9.  The Oxford ankle foot questionnaire for children: scaling, reliability and validity.

Authors:  C Morris; H A Doll; A Wainwright; T Theologis; R Fitzpatrick
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2008-11

10.  Development of the Oxford ankle foot questionnaire: finding out how children are affected by foot and ankle problems.

Authors:  C Morris; K Liabo; P Wright; R Fitzpatrick
Journal:  Child Care Health Dev       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.508

View more
  14 in total

1.  A systematic review of outcome tools used to measure lower leg conditions.

Authors:  Susan Shultz; Amanda Olszewski; Olivia Ramsey; Michelle Schmitz; Verrelle Wyatt; Chad Cook
Journal:  Int J Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2013-12

Review 2.  A systematic review of measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures for use in patients with foot or ankle diseases.

Authors:  Yuanxi Jia; Hsiaomin Huang; Joel J Gagnier
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2017-03-17       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Treatment of osteochondral defects of the talus in children.

Authors:  Nicolò Martinelli; Carlo Bonifacini; Giovanni Romeo; Elena Sartorelli
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-06-13       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Health-related quality of life in pediatric minor injury: reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory in the emergency department.

Authors:  Martha W Stevens; Keri R Hainsworth; Steven J Weisman; Peter M Layde
Journal:  Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med       Date:  2012-01

5.  Validation of the Italian version of the Oxford Ankle Foot Questionnaire for children.

Authors:  Nicolò Martinelli; Giovanni Romeo; Carlo Bonifacini; Marco Viganò; Alberto Bianchi; Francesco Malerba
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2015-07-14       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Pediatric Patients With Sport-Related Injuries: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ashley N Marshall; Hayley J Root; Tamara C Valovich McLeod; Kenneth C Lam
Journal:  J Athl Train       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 3.824

7.  Health-related quality of life in children with flexible flatfeet: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Alpesh Kothari; Julie Stebbins; Amy Beth Zavatsky; Tim Theologis
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 1.548

8.  The association of foot structure and footwear fit with disability in children and adolescents with Down syndrome.

Authors:  Polly Qx Lim; Nora Shields; Nikolaos Nikolopoulos; Joanna T Barrett; Angela M Evans; Nicholas F Taylor; Shannon E Munteanu
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2015-02-12       Impact factor: 2.303

9.  Patient perceptions of foot disability in Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis: a comparison of the juvenile arthritis foot disability index and the Oxford ankle foot questionnaire for children.

Authors:  Jill Ferrari
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2015-09-10       Impact factor: 2.303

10.  Systematic review of chronic ankle instability in children.

Authors:  Melissa Mandarakas; Fereshteh Pourkazemi; Amy Sman; Joshua Burns; Claire E Hiller
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2014-03-19       Impact factor: 2.303

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.