Louise Klokker1, Robin Christensen2,3, Richard Osborne4, Elisabeth Ginnerup5, Eva E Waehrens6,7, Henning Bliddal8, Marius Henriksen9. 1. The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg University Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark. Louise.Klokker.Madsen@regionh.dk. 2. The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg University Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark. robin.christensen@regionh.dk. 3. Faculty of Health Sciences, Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. robin.christensen@regionh.dk. 4. Faculty of Health, Population Health Strategic Research Centre, School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University, Burwood, Australia. richard.osborne@deakin.edu.au. 5. The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg University Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark. elisabeth.marie.ginnerup-nielsen@regionh.dk. 6. The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg University Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark. eva.elisabet.waehrens@regionh.dk. 7. The Research Initiative for Activity studies and Occupational Therapy, Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. eva.elisabet.waehrens@regionh.dk. 8. The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg University Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark. henning.bliddal@regionh.dk. 9. The Parker Institute, Bispebjerg & Frederiksberg University Hospitals, Copenhagen, Denmark. marius.henriksen@regionh.dk.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability, agreement and smallest detectable change in a measurement instrument for pain and function in knee osteoarthritis; the Dynamic weight-bearing Assessment of Pain (DAP). METHODS: The sample size was set to 20 persons, recruited from the outpatient osteoarthritis clinic at Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen. Two physiotherapists tested all participants during two visits; at the first visit, one single DAP (including four scores) was conducted by rater one; at the second visit, DAP was conducted by both raters one and two in randomized order with concealed allocation. The time interval was approximately 1.5 h. Measurement error was estimated by standard error of measurement (SEM). The intra- and inter-rater reliability was estimated by Intra-class Correlation Coefficients for agreement based on a two-way ANOVA with random effects (single measures ICC 2.1). Smallest detectable change (SDC) and limits of agreement were calculated. RESULTS: The pain score showed excellent reliability in terms of ICC (intra-rater 0.93, CI 0.83-0.97, inter-rater 0.91, CI 0.78-0.96), low SEM (intra-rater 0.70, inter-rater 0.86, on a scale from 0 to 10), and acceptable SDC for intra-rater test (1.95). The three knee bend scores all had ICC above 0.50, showing fair-to-good reliability. None of the knee bend scores showed acceptable SEM and SDC. CONCLUSIONS: The reproducibility of the DAP pain score meets the demands for use in clinical practice and research. The total knee bend could be useful for motivational purpose in clinical use. Testing of other psychometric properties of the DAP is pending.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability, agreement and smallest detectable change in a measurement instrument for pain and function in knee osteoarthritis; the Dynamic weight-bearing Assessment of Pain (DAP). METHODS: The sample size was set to 20 persons, recruited from the outpatientosteoarthritis clinic at Frederiksberg Hospital, Copenhagen. Two physiotherapists tested all participants during two visits; at the first visit, one single DAP (including four scores) was conducted by rater one; at the second visit, DAP was conducted by both raters one and two in randomized order with concealed allocation. The time interval was approximately 1.5 h. Measurement error was estimated by standard error of measurement (SEM). The intra- and inter-rater reliability was estimated by Intra-class Correlation Coefficients for agreement based on a two-way ANOVA with random effects (single measures ICC 2.1). Smallest detectable change (SDC) and limits of agreement were calculated. RESULTS: The pain score showed excellent reliability in terms of ICC (intra-rater 0.93, CI 0.83-0.97, inter-rater 0.91, CI 0.78-0.96), low SEM (intra-rater 0.70, inter-rater 0.86, on a scale from 0 to 10), and acceptable SDC for intra-rater test (1.95). The three knee bend scores all had ICC above 0.50, showing fair-to-good reliability. None of the knee bend scores showed acceptable SEM and SDC. CONCLUSIONS: The reproducibility of the DAPpain score meets the demands for use in clinical practice and research. The total knee bend could be useful for motivational purpose in clinical use. Testing of other psychometric properties of the DAP is pending.
Entities:
Keywords:
Knee osteoarthritis; Measurement; Pain; Physical function
Authors: Alexis A Wright; Chad E Cook; G David Baxter; John D Dockerty; J Haxby Abbott Journal: J Orthop Sports Phys Ther Date: 2011-02-18 Impact factor: 4.751
Authors: G A Hawker; L Stewart; M R French; J Cibere; J M Jordan; L March; M Suarez-Almazor; R Gooberman-Hill Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: F Dobson; R S Hinman; E M Roos; J H Abbott; P Stratford; A M Davis; R Buchbinder; L Snyder-Mackler; Y Henrotin; J Thumboo; P Hansen; K L Bennell Journal: Osteoarthritis Cartilage Date: 2013-05-13 Impact factor: 6.576
Authors: Louise Klokker; Robin Christensen; Eva E Wæhrens; Elisabeth Bandak; Cecilie Bartholdy; Henning Bliddal; Marius Henriksen Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2016-06-16 Impact factor: 3.186