Literature DB >> 26519187

The Oxford knee score and its subscales do not exhibit a ceiling or a floor effect in knee arthroplasty patients: an analysis of the National Health Service PROMs data set.

Kristina Harris1, Christopher R Lim2, Jill Dawson1, Ray Fitzpatrick1, David J Beard1, Andrew J Price1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In this study, we examined whether the OKS demonstrated a floor or a ceiling effect when used to measure the outcome of knee replacement surgery in a large national cohort.
METHODS: NHS PROMs database, containing pre- to 6 month post-operative OKS on 72,154 patients, mean age 69 (SD 9.4), undergoing knee replacement surgery, was examined to establish the proportion of patients achieving top or bottom OKS values pre- and post-operatively.
RESULTS: Pre-operatively, none of patients achieved the maximum/'best' (48) and minimum (0) scores. Post-operatively, no patients (0 %) achieved the minimum/'worst' score, but the percentage achieving the maximum score increased to 2.7 %. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that the highest post-operative overall ceiling percentage was 3 %, in a subgroup of patients between 60 and 79 years of age and 13.7 % in a group of patients who had a pre-operative OKS above 41. Furthermore, 10.8 % of patients achieved the top post-operative OKS-PCS and 4.7 % top post-operative OKS-FCS.
CONCLUSION: Based on NHS PROMs data, the OKS does not exhibit a ceiling or floor effect overall, or for both its pain and function subscales, and remains a valid measure of outcomes for patients undergoing TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Large-scale retrospective observations study, Level II.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arthroplasty; Ceiling; Floor; Function; Knee; OKS; Outcome; Oxford; Pain; Patient; Reported; Score; Subscale

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26519187     DOI: 10.1007/s00167-015-3788-0

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


  24 in total

1.  The Italian version of the Oxford 12-item Knee Questionnaire-cross-cultural adaptation and validation.

Authors:  R Padua; G Zanoli; E Ceccarelli; E Romanini; R Bondì; A Campi
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2003-04-02       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  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

3.  The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores.

Authors:  D W Murray; R Fitzpatrick; K Rogers; H Pandit; D J Beard; A J Carr; J Dawson
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2007-08

4.  Can pain and function be distinguished in the Oxford Knee Score in a meaningful way? An exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis.

Authors:  Kristina Harris; Jill Dawson; Helen Doll; Richard E Field; David W Murray; Raymond Fitzpatrick; Crispin Jenkinson; Andrew J Price; David J Beard
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-03-23       Impact factor: 4.147

5.  Measuring improvement following total hip and knee arthroplasty using patient-based measures of outcome.

Authors:  Robert G Marx; Edward C Jones; Nawal C Atwan; Robert F Closkey; Eduardo A Salvati; Thomas P Sculco
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  The Oxford Knee Score: compared performance before and after knee replacement.

Authors:  J-Y Jenny; Y Diesinger
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2012-05-18       Impact factor: 2.256

7.  The effect of surgical factors on early patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) following total knee replacement.

Authors:  P N Baker; D J Deehan; D Lees; S Jameson; P J Avery; P J Gregg; M R Reed
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2012-08

8.  Loss to follow-up after total hip replacement: a source of bias in patient reported outcome measures and registry datasets?

Authors:  Mohamed A Imam; Samuel Barke; Giles H Stafford; David Parkin; Richard E Field
Journal:  Hip Int       Date:  2014-06-26       Impact factor: 2.135

9.  Outcomes of elective surgery undertaken in independent sector treatment centres and NHS providers in England: audit of patient outcomes in surgery.

Authors:  J Chard; M Kuczawski; N Black; J van der Meulen
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-10-19

Review 10.  The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?

Authors:  Kim E Wamper; Inger N Sierevelt; Rudolf W Poolman; Mohit Bhandari; Daniël Haverkamp
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  4 in total

1.  Translation and Validation of the Hospital for Special Surgery Pediatric Functional Activity Brief Scale for French Paediatric Populations.

Authors:  Michael J Del Bel; Laryssa G Kemp; Céline I Girard; Julie Rossignol; Sébastien F Goulet; Jean-François Bourgon; Sasha Carsen; Daniel L Benoit
Journal:  Physiother Can       Date:  2020-11-01       Impact factor: 1.037

Review 2.  Medial stabilised total knee arthroplasty achieves comparable clinical outcomes when compared to other TKA designs: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the current literature.

Authors:  Sohail Nisar; Kashif Ahmad; Jeya Palan; Hemant Pandit; Bernard van Duren
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 4.114

3.  Association between VTE and antibiotic prophylaxis guideline compliance and patient-reported outcomes after total hip and knee arthroplasty: an observational study.

Authors:  Helen Badge; Tim Churches; Justine M Naylor; Wei Xuan; Elizabeth Armstrong; Leeanne Gray; John Fletcher; Iain Gosbell; Chung-Wei Christine Lin; Ian A Harris
Journal:  J Patient Rep Outcomes       Date:  2022-10-12

4.  Unicondylar knee arthroplasty following a patellectomy.

Authors:  Jantine Brauns; Hans Feyen
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2019-11-30
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.