Literature DB >> 24429183

Reliability and clinically important improvement thresholds for osteoarthritis pain and function scales: a multicenter study.

Jasvinder A Singh1, Ruili Luo, Glenn C Landon, Maria Suarez-Almazor.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess the reliability and clinically meaningful thresholds of intermittent and constant osteoarthritis pain (ICOAP) score, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical function Short-form (KOOS-PS), the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical function Short-form (HOOS-PS), and the Quality of life subscales of HOOS/KOOS (HOOS-QOL/KOOS-QOL) in patients with knee or hip arthritis.
METHODS: One hundred and ninety-five patients (141 knee, 54 hip) seen at 2 orthopedic outpatient clinics with a diagnosis of knee or hip OA completed patient-reported questionnaires (ICOAP pain scale, KOOS-PS, HOOS-PS, KOOS-QOL, HOOS-QOL) at baseline and 2-week followup. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). We calculated minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and moderate improvement in the subgroup that reported change in the status of their affected joint.
RESULTS: The reliability as assessed by ICC was as follows: ICOAP pain scale, 0.63 (0.48, 0.74) in patients with knee arthritis, and 0.86 (0.73, 0.93) for hip arthritis; KOOS-PS, 0.66 (0.52, 0.77); HOOS-PS, 0.82 (0.66, 0.91); KOOS-QOL, 0.79 (0.69, 0.86); and HOOS-QOL, 0.67 (0.42, 0.83). MCID and moderate improvement estimates in patients with knee arthritis were ICOAP pain scale, 18.5 and 26.7; KOOS-PS, 2.2 and 15.0; and KOOS-QOL, 8.0 and 15.6. A smaller sample in patients with hip arthritis precluded MCID and moderate improvement estimates.
CONCLUSION: We found that ICOAP pain and KOOS-PS/HOOS-PS scales were reasonably reliable in patients with hip OA. Reliability of these scales was much lower in patients with knee arthritis. Thresholds for clinically meaningful change in pain or function on these scales were estimated for patients with knee arthritis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ARTHRITIS; HIP; KNEE; PAIN; RELIABILITY; SENSITIVITY TO CHANGE

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24429183      PMCID: PMC3943561          DOI: 10.3899/jrheum.130609

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Rheumatol        ISSN: 0315-162X            Impact factor:   4.666


  31 in total

1.  Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation.

Authors:  R A Deyo; P Diehr; D L Patrick
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  1991-08

2.  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

3.  Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments.

Authors:  G Guyatt; S Walter; G Norman
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

4.  Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee.

Authors:  N Bellamy; W W Buchanan; C H Goldsmith; J Campbell; L W Stitt
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 4.666

5.  Validity and responsiveness of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in comparison with the SF-36 and WOMAC.

Authors:  E A Lingard; J N Katz; R J Wright; E A Wright; C B Sledge
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Psychometric properties of the OARSI/OMERACT osteoarthritis pain and functional impairment scales: ICOAP, KOOS-PS and HOOS-PS.

Authors:  A Ruyssen-Witrand; C J Fernandez-Lopez; L Gossec; P Anract; J P Courpied; M Dougados
Journal:  Clin Exp Rheumatol       Date:  2011-04-19       Impact factor: 4.473

7.  Minimal clinically important changes in chronic musculoskeletal pain intensity measured on a numerical rating scale.

Authors:  Fausto Salaffi; Andrea Stancati; Carlo Alberto Silvestri; Alessandro Ciapetti; Walter Grassi
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 3.931

8.  Interrater reliability of a modified Ashworth scale of muscle spasticity.

Authors:  R W Bohannon; M B Smith
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  1987-02

9.  The Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale. I. Development, use, and reliability.

Authors:  W K Goodman; L H Price; S A Rasmussen; C Mazure; R L Fleischmann; C L Hill; G R Heninger; D S Charney
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  1989-11

10.  Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS)--validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement.

Authors:  Anna K Nilsdotter; L Stefan Lohmander; Maria Klässbo; Ewa M Roos
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2003-05-30       Impact factor: 2.362

View more
  21 in total

1.  Validity and Responsiveness of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score: A Comparative Study Among Total Knee Replacement Patients.

Authors:  Barbara Gandek; John E Ware
Journal:  Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken)       Date:  2017-05-08       Impact factor: 4.794

2.  Statistics In Brief: Minimum Clinically Important Difference-Availability of Reliable Estimates.

Authors:  Mitchell Maltenfort; Claudio Díaz-Ledezma
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-01-03       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 3.  Arthroscopic surgery for degenerative tears of the meniscus: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Moin Khan; Nathan Evaniew; Asheesh Bedi; Olufemi R Ayeni; Mohit Bhandari
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2014-08-25       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  The association of pre-operative body pain diagram scores with pain outcomes following total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  A J Dave; F Selzer; E Losina; I Usiskin; J E Collins; Y C Lee; P Band; D F Dalury; R Iorio; K Kindsfater; J N Katz
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 6.576

5.  What Are the Minimal and Substantial Improvements in the HOOS and KOOS and JR Versions After Total Joint Replacement?

Authors:  Stephen Lyman; Yuo-Yu Lee; Alexander S McLawhorn; Wasif Islam; Catherine H MacLean
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  How do Patient-reported Outcome Scores in International Hip and Knee Arthroplasty Registries Compare?

Authors:  Lina Holm Ingelsrud; J Mark Wilkinson; Soren Overgaard; Ola Rolfson; Brian Hallstrom; Ronald A Navarro; Michael Terner; Sunita Karmakar-Hore; Greg Webster; Luke Slawomirski; Adrian Sayers; Candan Kendir; Katherine de Bienassis; Niek Klazinga; Annette W Dahl; Eric Bohm
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-07-08       Impact factor: 4.755

Review 7.  Selecting patient-reported outcome measures of health-related quality of life in adult rheumatology: quality and breadth of coverage.

Authors:  Erin Knight; Karen E Schifferdecker; Guy S Eakin; Bryce B Reeve
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2022-09-20       Impact factor: 3.580

8.  The AktiWeb study: feasibility of a web-based exercise program delivered by a patient organisation to patients with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Kenth Louis Joseph; Hanne Dagfinrud; Kåre Birger Hagen; Kristine Røren Nordén; Camilla Fongen; Ole-Martin Wold; Rana S Hinman; Rachel K Nelligan; Kim L Bennell; Anne Therese Tveter
Journal:  Pilot Feasibility Stud       Date:  2022-07-20

Review 9.  Patient-Reported Measures of Physical Function in Knee Osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Daniel K White; Hiral Master
Journal:  Rheum Dis Clin North Am       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 2.670

10.  Defining the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Heinrichs-carpenter quality of life scale (QLS).

Authors:  Bruno Falissard; Christophe Sapin; Jean-Yves Loze; Wally Landsberg; Karina Hansen
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2015-08-04       Impact factor: 4.035

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.