Literature DB >> 24179325

Clinimetrics corner: the Global Rating of Change Score (GRoC) poorly correlates with functional measures and is not temporally stable.

Craig Garrison1, Chad Cook.   

Abstract

The Global Rating of Change Score (GRoC) is a frequently used outcome measure that is used independently to measure improvements in a patient's condition or as an anchor for other outcomes measures. The tool has been criticized for recall bias, biases in administration, and for poor reliability over time. Our findings, captured from a sample of patients with shoulder impingement, suggest that all these concerns are of merit. Our results show poor correlation of the GRoC with functional measures after 2 and 3 weeks and decay of the associative stability of the GRoC from week to week.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Global Rating of Change; Outcomes measures; Shoulder impingement

Year:  2012        PMID: 24179325      PMCID: PMC3500130          DOI: 10.1179/1066981712Z.00000000022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Man Manip Ther        ISSN: 1066-9817


  13 in total

1.  American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section: reliability, validity, and responsiveness.

Authors:  Lori A Michener; Philip W McClure; Brian J Sennett
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2002 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.019

2.  Relative validity of the modified American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (M-ASES) questionnaire using item response theory.

Authors:  Chad Cook; Eric Hegedus; Adam Goode; Curtis Mina; Ricardo Pietrobon; Lawrence D Higgins
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2007-08-15       Impact factor: 2.631

3.  The patient-specific functional scale: validation of its use in persons with neck dysfunction.

Authors:  M D Westaway; P W Stratford; J M Binkley
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 4.751

4.  The validity of prospective and retrospective global change criterion measures.

Authors:  John Schmitt; Richard P Di Fabio
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.966

5.  Mode of administration bias.

Authors:  Chad Cook
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2010-06

6.  Methodological problems in the retrospective computation of responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach.

Authors:  G R Norman; P Stratford; G Regehr
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference.

Authors:  R Jaeschke; J Singer; G H Guyatt
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1989-12

8.  Psychometric properties of the shortened disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH) and Numeric Pain Rating Scale in patients with shoulder pain.

Authors:  Paul E Mintken; Paul Glynn; Joshua A Cleland
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2009-03-17       Impact factor: 3.019

9.  Global rating of change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design.

Authors:  Steven J Kamper; Christopher G Maher; Grant Mackay
Journal:  J Man Manip Ther       Date:  2009

10.  Beyond minimally important change: defining a successful outcome of physical therapy for patients with low back pain.

Authors:  Julie M Fritz; Jeff Hebert; Shane Koppenhaver; Eric Parent
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  7 in total

1.  Feasibility and Validity of Asking Patients to Define Individual Levels of Meaningful Change on Patient-Reported Outcomes.

Authors:  Salene M W Jones; Yuxian Du; Ari Bell-Brown; Kaylin Bolt; Joseph M Unger
Journal:  J Patient Cent Res Rev       Date:  2020-07-27

2.  Development of the University of Wisconsin Running Injury and Recovery Index.

Authors:  Evan O Nelson; Michael Ryan; Erin AufderHeide; Bryan Heiderscheit
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  2019-08-03       Impact factor: 4.751

3.  The value of patient global assessment in lumbar spine surgery: an evaluation based on more than 90,000 patients.

Authors:  C Parai; O Hägg; B Lind; H Brisby
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-10-20       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Responsiveness and interpretability of commonly used outcome assessments of mobility capacity in older hospital patients with cognitive spectrum disorders.

Authors:  Tobias Braun; Christian Thiel; Ralf-Joachim Schulz; Christian Grüneberg
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 3.186

5.  The inclusion of mobilisation with movement to a standard exercise programme for patients with rotator cuff related pain: a randomised, placebo-controlled protocol trial.

Authors:  Rafael Baeske; Toby Hall; Marcelo Faria Silva
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 2.362

6.  Disablement in the Physically Active Scale Short Form-8: psychometric evaluation.

Authors:  Madeline P Casanova; Megan C Nelson; Michael A Pickering; Lindsay W Larkins; Karen M Appleby; Emma J Grindley; Russell T Baker
Journal:  BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-12-14

7.  Psychometric properties of the global rating of change scales in patients with low back pain, upper and lower extremity disorders. A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Authors:  Pavlos Bobos; Christina Ziebart; Rochelle Furtado; Ze Lu; Joy C MacDermid
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2020-02-10
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.