Marc Beirer1, Nico Fiedler2, Stephan Huber2, Marcus Schmitt-Sody3, Stephan Lorenz4, Peter Biberthaler2, Chlodwig Kirchhoff2. 1. Department of Trauma Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. Electronic address: marc.beirer@mri.tum.de. 2. Department of Trauma Surgery, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany. 3. Medical Park Bernau Chiemsee, Bernau am Chiemsee, Germany. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop and validate an all-purpose patient-reported outcome questionnaire for a patient-based follow-up examination regarding knee disorders. METHODS: Each scale of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm knee score, Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) score, and Tegner score was analyzed, and after matching of the general topics, the dedicated items underwent a fusion to the final Munich Knee Questionnaire (MKQ) item and a score comprising 33 items was created. In a prospective clinical study, we evaluated validity, reliability, and responsiveness in 152 physical active patients (75 women and 77 men; mean age, 47 years) with traumatic as well as degenerative knee disorders. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability was substantial, with intraclass correlation coefficients of at least 0.91. Construct validity and responsiveness were confirmed by correlation coefficients of 0.78 to 0.86 (P = .01) and 0.41 to 0.71, respectively. Correlation coefficients of the original scores (KOOS, IKDC, Lysholm, WOMET, and Tegner) and the scores calculated from the MKQ were between 0.80 and 0.91 (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The MKQ is a reliable and valid patient-reported outcome questionnaire for assessing knee function. It seems to enable the calculation of the original items of the KOOS, IKDC score, Lysholm knee score, WOMET score, and Tegner score. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The MKQ facilitates the comparison of treatment results in knee disorders and allows the evaluation of treatment efficacy. Identified inadequate treatment concepts could be eliminated, leading to increased patient satisfaction and optimized quality of health care.
PURPOSE: To develop and validate an all-purpose patient-reported outcome questionnaire for a patient-based follow-up examination regarding knee disorders. METHODS: Each scale of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score, Lysholm knee score, Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) score, and Tegner score was analyzed, and after matching of the general topics, the dedicated items underwent a fusion to the final Munich Knee Questionnaire (MKQ) item and a score comprising 33 items was created. In a prospective clinical study, we evaluated validity, reliability, and responsiveness in 152 physical active patients (75 women and 77 men; mean age, 47 years) with traumatic as well as degenerative knee disorders. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability was substantial, with intraclass correlation coefficients of at least 0.91. Construct validity and responsiveness were confirmed by correlation coefficients of 0.78 to 0.86 (P = .01) and 0.41 to 0.71, respectively. Correlation coefficients of the original scores (KOOS, IKDC, Lysholm, WOMET, and Tegner) and the scores calculated from the MKQ were between 0.80 and 0.91 (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The MKQ is a reliable and valid patient-reported outcome questionnaire for assessing knee function. It seems to enable the calculation of the original items of the KOOS, IKDC score, Lysholm knee score, WOMET score, and Tegner score. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The MKQ facilitates the comparison of treatment results in knee disorders and allows the evaluation of treatment efficacy. Identified inadequate treatment concepts could be eliminated, leading to increased patient satisfaction and optimized quality of health care.
Authors: Frederik Greve; Karl Friedrich Braun; Veronika Vitzthum; Michael Zyskowski; Michael Müller; Chlodwig Kirchhoff; Peter Biberthaler; Marc Beirer Journal: Eur J Med Res Date: 2018-09-28 Impact factor: 2.175