CONTEXT: Clinicians are urged to document patient-based outcomes during rehabilitation to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL) from the patient's perspective. It is unclear how scores on patient-reported outcome instruments (PROs) vary over the course of an athletic season because of normal athletic participation. OBJECTIVE: Our primary purpose was to evaluate the effect of administration time point on HRQOL during an athletic season. Secondary purposes were to determine test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change scores of 3 PROs commonly used in clinical practice and if a relationship exists between generic and region-specific outcome instruments. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Athletic facility. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three collegiate soccer athletes (11 men, 12 women). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): At 5 time points over a spring season, we administered the Disablement in the Physically Active Scale (DPA), Foot and Ankle Ability Measure-Sport, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). RESULTS: Time effects were observed for the DPA (P = .011) and KOOS Quality of Life subscale (P = .027). However, the differences between individual time points did not surpass the minimal detectable change for the DPA, and no post hoc analyses were significant for the KOOS-Quality of Life subscale. Test-retest reliability was moderate for the KOOS-Pain subscale (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.71) and good for the remaining KOOS subscales, DPA, and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure-Sport (intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.79). The DPA and KOOS-Sport subscale demonstrated a significant moderate relationship (P = .018). CONCLUSIONS: Athletic participation during a nontraditional, spring soccer season did not affect HRQOL. All 3 PROs were reliable and could be used clinically to monitor changes in health status throughout an athletic season. Our results demonstrate that significant deviations in scores were related to factors other than participation, such as injury. Finally, both generic and region-specific instruments should be used in clinical practice.
CONTEXT: Clinicians are urged to document patient-based outcomes during rehabilitation to measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL) from the patient's perspective. It is unclear how scores on patient-reported outcome instruments (PROs) vary over the course of an athletic season because of normal athletic participation. OBJECTIVE: Our primary purpose was to evaluate the effect of administration time point on HRQOL during an athletic season. Secondary purposes were to determine test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change scores of 3 PROs commonly used in clinical practice and if a relationship exists between generic and region-specific outcome instruments. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Athletic facility. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-three collegiate soccer athletes (11 men, 12 women). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): At 5 time points over a spring season, we administered the Disablement in the Physically Active Scale (DPA), Foot and Ankle Ability Measure-Sport, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). RESULTS: Time effects were observed for the DPA (P = .011) and KOOS Quality of Life subscale (P = .027). However, the differences between individual time points did not surpass the minimal detectable change for the DPA, and no post hoc analyses were significant for the KOOS-Quality of Life subscale. Test-retest reliability was moderate for the KOOS-Pain subscale (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.71) and good for the remaining KOOS subscales, DPA, and Foot and Ankle Ability Measure-Sport (intraclass correlation coefficients > 0.79). The DPA and KOOS-Sport subscale demonstrated a significant moderate relationship (P = .018). CONCLUSIONS: Athletic participation during a nontraditional, spring soccer season did not affect HRQOL. All 3 PROs were reliable and could be used clinically to monitor changes in health status throughout an athletic season. Our results demonstrate that significant deviations in scores were related to factors other than participation, such as injury. Finally, both generic and region-specific instruments should be used in clinical practice.
Authors: Robroy L Martin; James J Irrgang; Ray G Burdett; Stephen F Conti; Jessie M Van Swearingen Journal: Foot Ankle Int Date: 2005-11 Impact factor: 2.827
Authors: Tamara C Valovich McLeod; Alison R Snyder; John T Parsons; R Curtis Bay; Lori A Michener; Eric L Sauers Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2008 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: G Russell Huffman; Jung Park; Chris Roser-Jones; Brian J Sennett; Gautum Yagnik; David Webner Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Madeline P Casanova; Megan C Nelson; Michael A Pickering; Lindsay W Larkins; Karen M Appleby; Emma J Grindley; Russell T Baker Journal: BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil Date: 2021-12-14