PURPOSE: The Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS) was developed because of the need for a reliable, valid and sensitive instrument to evaluate symptoms and their effects on physical activity in patients following either conservative or surgical management of an Achilles tendon rupture. Prior to using the score in larger randomized trial in an English-speaking population, we decided to perform reliability, validity and responsiveness evaluations of the English version of the ATRS. Even though the score was published in English, the actual English version has not be validated and compared to the results of the Swedish version. METHODS: From 2009 to 2010, all patients who received treatment for Achilles tendon rupture were followed up using the English version of the ATRS. Patients were asked to complete the score at 3, 6 and 12 months following treatment for Achilles tendon rupture. The ATRS was completed on arrival in the outpatient clinic and again following consultation. RESULTS: The outcomes of 49 (13 female and 36 male) patients were assessed. The mean (SD) age was 49 (12) years, and 27 patients had treatment for a left-sided rupture, 22 the right. All patients received treatment for ruptured Achilles tendons: 38 acute percutaneous repair, 1 open repair, 5 an Achilles tendon reconstruction using a Peroneus Brevis tendon transfer for delayed presentation, 1 gracilis augmented repair for re-rupture and 4 non-operative treatment for mid-portion rupture. The English version of ATRS was shown to have overall excellent reliability (ICC = 0.986). There was no significant difference between the results with the English version and the Swedish version when compared at the 6-month- or 12-month (n.s.) follow-up appointments. The effect size was 0.93. The minimal detectable change was 6.75 points. CONCLUSIONS: The ATRS was culturally adapted to English and shown to be a reliable, valid and responsive method of testing functional outcome following an Achilles tendon rupture.
PURPOSE: The Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS) was developed because of the need for a reliable, valid and sensitive instrument to evaluate symptoms and their effects on physical activity in patients following either conservative or surgical management of an Achilles tendon rupture. Prior to using the score in larger randomized trial in an English-speaking population, we decided to perform reliability, validity and responsiveness evaluations of the English version of the ATRS. Even though the score was published in English, the actual English version has not be validated and compared to the results of the Swedish version. METHODS: From 2009 to 2010, all patients who received treatment for Achilles tendon rupture were followed up using the English version of the ATRS. Patients were asked to complete the score at 3, 6 and 12 months following treatment for Achilles tendon rupture. The ATRS was completed on arrival in the outpatient clinic and again following consultation. RESULTS: The outcomes of 49 (13 female and 36 male) patients were assessed. The mean (SD) age was 49 (12) years, and 27 patients had treatment for a left-sided rupture, 22 the right. All patients received treatment for ruptured Achilles tendons: 38 acute percutaneous repair, 1 open repair, 5 an Achilles tendon reconstruction using a Peroneus Brevis tendon transfer for delayed presentation, 1 gracilis augmented repair for re-rupture and 4 non-operative treatment for mid-portion rupture. The English version of ATRS was shown to have overall excellent reliability (ICC = 0.986). There was no significant difference between the results with the English version and the Swedish version when compared at the 6-month- or 12-month (n.s.) follow-up appointments. The effect size was 0.93. The minimal detectable change was 6.75 points. CONCLUSIONS: The ATRS was culturally adapted to English and shown to be a reliable, valid and responsive method of testing functional outcome following an Achilles tendon rupture.
Authors: Nicklas Olsson; Katarina Nilsson-Helander; Jón Karlsson; Bengt I Eriksson; Roland Thomée; Eva Faxén; Karin Grävare Silbernagel Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2011-04-30 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Katarina Nilsson-Helander; Roland Thomeé; Karin Grävare Silbernagel; Karin Grävare-Silbernagel; Pia Thomeé; Eva Faxén; Bengt I Eriksson; Jon Karlsson Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2006-12-07 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Katarina Nilsson-Helander; Karin Grävare Silbernagel; Roland Thomeé; Eva Faxén; Nicklas Olsson; Bengt I Eriksson; Jon Karlsson Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2010-08-27 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: A Busilacchi; M Olivieri; S Ulisse; R Gesuita; E Skrami; T Lording; F Fusini; A Gigante Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-12-25 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Man Hung; Charles L Saltzman; Richard Kendall; Jerry Bounsanga; Maren W Voss; Brandon Lawrence; Ryan Spiker; Darrel Brodke Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Alberto Vascellari; Pietro Spennacchio; Alberto Combi; Alberto Grassi; Silvio Patella; Salvatore Bisicchia; Gian Luigi Canata; Stefano Zaffagnini Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: M R Carmont; C Heaver; A Pradhan; O Mei-Dan; K Gravare Silbernagel Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2013-02-02 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: R Rousseau; A Gerometta; S Fogerty; E Rolland; Y Catonné; F Khiami Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2014-04-19 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: Man Hung; Charles L Saltzman; Maren W Voss; Jerry Bounsanga; Richard Kendall; Ryan Spiker; Brandon Lawrence; Darrel Brodke Journal: Spine J Date: 2018-06-30 Impact factor: 4.166
Authors: Michael R Carmont; Karin Grävare Silbernagel; Antonia Edge; Omer Mei-Dan; Jón Karlsson; Nicola Maffulli Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2013-06-20