Literature DB >> 25982625

The Elbow Self-Assessment Score (ESAS): development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measurement tool for elbow disorders.

Marc Beirer1, Henrik Friese2, Andreas Lenich3, Moritz Crönlein2, Gunther H Sandmann2, Peter Biberthaler2, Chlodwig Kirchhoff2, Sebastian Siebenlist2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To develop and validate an elbow self-assessment score considering subjective as well as objective parameters.
METHODS: Each scale of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons-Elbow Score, the Broberg and Morrey rating system (BMS), the Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE) Questionnaire, the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), the Oxford Elbow Score (OES) and the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (Quick-DASH) was analysed, and after matching of the general topics, the dedicated items underwent a fusion to the final ESAS's item and a score containing 22 items was created. In a prospective clinical study, validity, reliability and responsiveness in physically active patients with traumatic as well as degenerative elbow disorders were evaluated.
RESULTS: Validation study included 103 patients (48 women, 55 men; mean age 43 years). A high test-retest reliability was found with intraclass correlation coefficients of at least 0.71. Construct validity and responsiveness were confirmed by correlation coefficients of -0.80 to -0.84 and 0.72-0.84 (p <0.05). Correlation coefficients of the ESAS and well-established elbow rating systems BMS, PREE, MEPS, OES and Quick-DASH were between 0.70 and 0.90 (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: With this novel Elbow Self-Assessment Score (ESAS), a valid and reliable instrument for a qualitative self-assessment of subjective and objective parameters (e.g. range of motion) of the elbow joint is demonstrated. Quantitative measurement of elbow function may not longer be limited to specific elbow disorders or patient groups. The ESAS seems to allow for a broad application in clinical research studying elbow patients and may facilitate the comparison of treatment results in elbow disorders. The treatment efficacy can be easily evaluated, and treatment concepts could be reviewed and revised. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic study, Level III.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Elbow disorders; Outcome measurement tool; Reliability; Responsiveness; Self-assessment score; Validity

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25982625     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-015-3647-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc        ISSN: 0942-2056            Impact factor:   4.342


  23 in total

1.  Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires.

Authors:  Caroline B Terwee; Sandra D M Bot; Michael R de Boer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Dirk L Knol; Joost Dekker; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2006-08-24       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  A comparison of mail, telephone, and home interview strategies for household health surveys.

Authors:  J Siemiatycki
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 9.308

Review 3.  Outcome evaluation in patients with elbow pathology: issues in instrument development and evaluation.

Authors:  J C MacDermid
Journal:  J Hand Ther       Date:  2001 Apr-Jun       Impact factor: 1.950

4.  Results of treatment of fracture-dislocations of the elbow.

Authors:  M A Broberg; B F Morrey
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Use of the Liverpool Elbow Score as a postal questionnaire for the assessment of outcome after total elbow arthroplasty.

Authors:  Alexander M Ashmore; Charles Gozzard; Neil Blewitt
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2006-12-12       Impact factor: 3.019

6.  Mind the MIC: large variation among populations and methods.

Authors:  Caroline B Terwee; Leo D Roorda; Joost Dekker; Sita M Bierma-Zeinstra; George Peat; Kelvin P Jordan; Peter Croft; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2009-11-18       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  The development and validation of a patient-reported questionnaire to assess outcomes of elbow surgery.

Authors:  J Dawson; H Doll; I Boller; R Fitzpatrick; C Little; J Rees; C Jenkinson; A J Carr
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2008-04

8.  Development and validation of an elbow score.

Authors:  P Sathyamoorthy; G J Kemp; A Rawal; V Rayner; S P Frostick
Journal:  Rheumatology (Oxford)       Date:  2004-08-10       Impact factor: 7.580

9.  Protocol of the COSMIN study: COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments.

Authors:  L B Mokkink; C B Terwee; D L Knol; P W Stratford; J Alonso; D L Patrick; L M Bouter; H C W de Vet
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2006-01-24       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Extending the use of PROMs in the NHS--using the Oxford Knee Score in patients undergoing non-operative management for knee osteoarthritis: a validation study.

Authors:  Kristina K Harris; Jill Dawson; Luke D Jones; David J Beard; Andrew J Price
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-08-21       Impact factor: 2.692

View more
  14 in total

Review 1.  Distal biceps brachii tendon repair: a systematic review of patient outcome determination using modified Coleman methodology score criteria.

Authors:  John Nyland; Brandon Causey; Jeff Wera; Ryan Krupp; David Tate; Amit Gupta
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-12-12       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  [Importance of self-assessment in functional evaluation of trauma patients].

Authors:  M Beirer; P Biberthaler
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  Grafting and fixation after aseptic non-union of the humeral shaft: A case series.

Authors:  Giuseppe Rollo; Ante Prkic; Michele Bisaccia; Denise Eygendaal; Paolo Pichierri; Antonio Marsilio; Marco Giaracuni; Luigi Meccariello
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-08-31

4.  Plate-and-bone-strut fixation of distal third humeral shaft aseptic non-unions: A consecutive case series.

Authors:  Giuseppe Rollo; Ante Prkić; Paolo Pichierri; Denise Eygendaal; Michele Bisaccia; Marco Filipponi; Marco Giaracuni; Philip Hitov; Kostadin Tanovski; Luigi Meccariello
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2019-05-07

5.  Arthroscopic arthrolysis provides good clinical outcome in post-traumatic and degenerative elbow stiffness.

Authors:  Lukas Willinger; Sebastian Siebenlist; Andreas Lenich; Franz Liska; Andreas B Imhoff; Andrea Achtnich
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2017-07-01       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Validation of the Liverpool Elbow Score for evaluation of elbow stiffness.

Authors:  Ziyang Sun; Cunyi Fan
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 2.362

7.  The Munich Ankle Questionnaire (MAQ): a self-assessment tool for a comprehensive evaluation of ankle disorders.

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

8.  Reduction and stabilization of radial neck fractures by intramedullary pinning: a technique not only for children.

Authors:  G H Sandmann; M Crönlein; M Neumaier; M Beirer; A Buchholz; U Stöckle; P Biberthaler; S Siebenlist
Journal:  Eur J Med Res       Date:  2016-04-12       Impact factor: 2.175

9.  Development and validation of a novel questionnaire for self-determination of the range of motion of wrist and elbow.

Authors:  Marc Schnetzke; Svenja Schüler; Holger Keil; Sara Aytac; Stefan Studier-Fischer; Paul-Alfred Grützner; Thorsten Guehring
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-07-26       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Development of a German fracture register to assess current fracture care and improve treatment quality: A feasibility study.

Authors:  Marc Beirer; Chlodwig Kirchhoff; Peter Biberthaler
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2017-12-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.