Literature DB >> 25193485

Patient-specific evaluation of knee disorders in clinical practice.

Lukas Leopold Negrin1, Stefan Hajdu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Nowadays, an increasing number of patients expect their physician to provide a measureable and, therefore, comparable treatment effect that quantifies success or failure of the applied therapy. Unfortunately, different knee classification schemes applied to the same patient may provide diverging results. Therefore, the objective of this paper was to present recommendations to clinicians for a meaningful outcome assessment of their patients.
METHODS: Out of 39 knee evaluation systems available in the literature, we performed an elimination process based on the criteria (1) widespread use, (2) available reference values and (3) publication of at least one validation study.
RESULTS: Six clinical scores were detected which met the inclusion criteria. Owing to authors' recommendations and personal opinion the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Score, the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) were identified to be the most suitable outcome measures that enable patients a realistic assessment of their treatment effect compared with individuals in similar life situations.
CONCLUSION: To our opinion the IKDC should be applied to athletic patients suffering from post-traumatic knee symptoms who are younger than 50 years. For non-athletes aged 50 years and older the WOMAC is considered suitable whereas the KOOS is recommended to all other patients with knee disorders.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25193485     DOI: 10.1007/s00508-014-0600-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Wien Klin Wochenschr        ISSN: 0043-5325            Impact factor:   1.704


  25 in total

Review 1.  Knee injury rating scales.

Authors:  Jack Lysholm; Yelverton Tegner
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 3.717

Review 2.  Knee injury outcomes measures.

Authors:  Rick W Wright
Journal:  J Am Acad Orthop Surg       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 3.020

3.  A rationale for assessing sports activity levels and limitations in knee disorders.

Authors:  F R Noyes; S D Barber; L A Mooar
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Critical analysis of knee ligament rating systems.

Authors:  N A Sgaglione; W Del Pizzo; J M Fox; M J Friedman
Journal:  Am J Sports Med       Date:  1995 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 6.202

5.  Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries.

Authors:  Y Tegner; J Lysholm
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1985-09       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Measuring the population impact of knee pain and disability with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC).

Authors:  Clare Jinks; Kelvin Jordan; Peter Croft
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 6.961

7.  Development of a patient-reported measure of function of the knee.

Authors:  J J Irrgang; L Snyder-Mackler; R S Wainner; F H Fu; C D Harner
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)--development of a self-administered outcome measure.

Authors:  E M Roos; H P Roos; L S Lohmander; C Ekdahl; B D Beynnon
Journal:  J Orthop Sports Phys Ther       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.751

Review 9.  Knee ligament injury, surgery and osteoarthrosis. Truth or consequences?

Authors:  L S Lohmander; H Roos
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1994-12

Review 10.  The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): from joint injury to osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Ewa M Roos; L Stefan Lohmander
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2003-11-03       Impact factor: 3.186

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.