Ashley Halket1, Paul W Stratford, Deborah M Kennedy, Linda J Woodhouse, Gregory Spadoni. 1. Ashley Halket, BA, CAT(C), MSc: Assistant Clinical Director, Sheridan College, Oakville, Ontario. At the time of the study, Ms Halket was completing her MSc at the School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To estimate the test-retest reliability of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain sub-scale and performance-specific assessments of pain, as well as the association between these measures for patients awaiting primary total hip or knee arthroplasty as a consequence of osteoarthritis. METHODS: A total of 164 patients awaiting unilateral primary hip or knee arthroplasty completed four performance measures (self-paced walk, timed up and go, stair test, six-minute walk) and the WOMAC. Scores for 22 of these patients provided test-retest reliability data. Estimates of test-retest reliability (Type 2,1 intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] and standard error of measurement [SEM]) and the association between measures were examined. RESULTS: ICC values for individual performance-specific pain ratings were between 0.70 and 0.86; SEM values were between 0.97 and 1.33 pain points. ICC estimates for the four-item performance pain ratings and the WOMAC pain sub-scale were 0.82 and 0.57 respectively. The correlation between the sum of the pain scores for the four performance measures and the WOMAC pain sub-scale was 0.62. CONCLUSION: Reliability estimates for the performance-specific assessments of pain using the numeric pain rating scale were consistent with values reported for patients with a spectrum of musculoskeletal conditions. The reliability estimate for the WOMAC pain sub-scale was lower than typically reported in the literature. The level of association between the WOMAC pain sub-scale and the various performance-specific pain scales suggests that the scores can be used interchangeably when applied to groups but not for individual patients.
PURPOSE: To estimate the test-retest reliability of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain sub-scale and performance-specific assessments of pain, as well as the association between these measures for patients awaiting primary total hip or knee arthroplasty as a consequence of osteoarthritis. METHODS: A total of 164 patients awaiting unilateral primary hip or knee arthroplasty completed four performance measures (self-paced walk, timed up and go, stair test, six-minute walk) and the WOMAC. Scores for 22 of these patients provided test-retest reliability data. Estimates of test-retest reliability (Type 2,1 intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] and standard error of measurement [SEM]) and the association between measures were examined. RESULTS: ICC values for individual performance-specific pain ratings were between 0.70 and 0.86; SEM values were between 0.97 and 1.33 pain points. ICC estimates for the four-item performance pain ratings and the WOMAC pain sub-scale were 0.82 and 0.57 respectively. The correlation between the sum of the pain scores for the four performance measures and the WOMAC pain sub-scale was 0.62. CONCLUSION: Reliability estimates for the performance-specific assessments of pain using the numeric pain rating scale were consistent with values reported for patients with a spectrum of musculoskeletal conditions. The reliability estimate for the WOMAC pain sub-scale was lower than typically reported in the literature. The level of association between the WOMAC pain sub-scale and the various performance-specific pain scales suggests that the scores can be used interchangeably when applied to groups but not for individual patients.
Authors: Marc Faucher; Serge Poiraudeau; Marie Martine Lefevre-Colau; François Rannou; Jacques Fermanian; Michel Revel Journal: Joint Bone Spine Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 4.929
Authors: G H Guyatt; S O Pugsley; M J Sullivan; P J Thompson; L Berman; N L Jones; E L Fallen; D W Taylor Journal: Thorax Date: 1984-11 Impact factor: 9.139
Authors: Caroline B Terwee; Rienk M A van der Slikke; Rob C van Lummel; Rob J Benink; Wil G H Meijers; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: F Salaffi; G Leardini; B Canesi; A Mannoni; A Fioravanti; R Caporali; G Lapadula; L Punzi Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Mohammad Guermazi; Serge Poiraudeau; Monem Yahia; Monia Mezganni; Jacques Fermanian; M Habib Elleuch; Michel Revel Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2004-06 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Deborah M Kennedy; Paul W Stratford; Jean Wessel; Jeffrey D Gollish; Dianne Penney Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2005-01-28 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: M M Campo; G M M J Kerkhoffs; I N Sierevelt; R R Weeseman; H M Van der Vis; G H R Albers Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2011-06-01 Impact factor: 4.342