Literature DB >> 30417223

Validation of a new symptom outcome for knee osteoarthritis: the Ambulation Adjusted Score for Knee pain.

Grace H Lo1,2, Jing Song3, Timothy E McAlindon4, Gillian A Hawker5, Jeffrey B Driban4, Lori Lyn Price6, Charles B Eaton7, Marc C Hochberg8, Rebecca D Jackson9, C Kent Kwoh10, Michael C Nevitt11, Dorothy D Dunlop3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Validation of a symptom measure for early knee OA may help identify new treatments and modifiable risk factors. Symptom measures that consider pain in the context of activity level may provide better discrimination than pain alone. Therefore, we aimed to compare sensitivity to change for radiographic progression between Ambulation Adjusted Score for Knee pain (AASK), which accounts for self-reported ambulation, and Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) knee pain score.
DESIGN: Participants were assessed annually up to 48 months using WOMAC, Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly (PASE) ambulation, and knee radiographs. AASK was defined as ((WOMAC pain) + 1)/((average daily hours of walking) + 1). Radiographs were scored for Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade. Linear regression, stratified by OA status, evaluated relationships between changes in AASK and WOMAC pain and KL grade over time.
RESULTS: For 4191 people (8030 knees), the mean age was 61.2 (+ 9.2) years old and BMI was 28.6 (+ 4.8) kg/m2; 58% female. Over 40% of knees had WOMAC pain scores of 0; by design, no knees had AASK scores of 0. Annual changes in AASK were more sensitive to changes in KL than changes in WOMAC in those without baseline OA (0.20 and 0.16 change per unit KL change, p = 0.005 and 0.070 respectively), but performed similarly in knees with OA.
CONCLUSION: AASK is simple to assess using existing validated questionnaires. AASK performs well in individuals with and without OA and should be considered in clinical trials and observational studies of early knee OA.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Knee; Measurement; Osteoarthritis; Outcome measure; Validation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30417223      PMCID: PMC6853599          DOI: 10.1007/s10067-018-4352-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Rheumatol        ISSN: 0770-3198            Impact factor:   2.980


  24 in total

1.  Analysis of the discordance between radiographic changes and knee pain in osteoarthritis of the knee.

Authors:  M T Hannan; D T Felson; T Pincus
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 4.666

2.  The Bristol 'OA500' study: progression of osteoarthritis (OA) over 3 years and the relationship between clinical and radiographic changes at the knee joint.

Authors:  P A Dieppe; J Cushnaghan; L Shepstone
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 6.576

3.  Pain assessment in osteoarthritis: experience with the WOMAC osteoarthritis index.

Authors:  N Bellamy
Journal:  Semin Arthritis Rheum       Date:  1989-05       Impact factor: 5.532

4.  A preliminary evaluation of the dimensionality and clinical importance of pain and disability in osteoarthritis of the hip and knee.

Authors:  N Bellamy; W W Buchanan
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  1986-06       Impact factor: 2.980

5.  Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee.

Authors:  N Bellamy; W W Buchanan; C H Goldsmith; J Campbell; L W Stitt
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 4.666

6.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data.

Authors:  J R Landis; G G Koch
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1977-03       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Comparison of fixed-flexion positioning with fluoroscopic semi-flexed positioning for quantifying radiographic joint-space width in the knee: test-retest reproducibility.

Authors:  C Peterfy; J Li; S Zaim; J Duryea; J Lynch; Y Miaux; W Yu; H K Genant
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2003-02-06       Impact factor: 2.199

8.  Insurer and out-of-pocket costs of osteoarthritis in the US: evidence from national survey data.

Authors:  Harry Kotlarz; Candace L Gunnarsson; Hai Fang; John A Rizzo
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2009-12

9.  Comparative, validity and responsiveness of the HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS to the WOMAC physical function subscale in total joint replacement for osteoarthritis.

Authors:  A M Davis; A V Perruccio; M Canizares; G A Hawker; E M Roos; J-F Maillefert; L S Lohmander
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2009-01-31       Impact factor: 6.576

10.  The effects of specific medical conditions on the functional limitations of elders in the Framingham Study.

Authors:  A A Guccione; D T Felson; J J Anderson; J M Anthony; Y Zhang; P W Wilson; M Kelly-Hayes; P A Wolf; B E Kreger; W B Kannel
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1994-03       Impact factor: 9.308

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Defining and predicting radiographic knee osteoarthritis progression: a systematic review of findings from the osteoarthritis initiative.

Authors:  Peter Y Joo; Alireza Borjali; Antonia F Chen; Orhun K Muratoglu; Kartik M Varadarajan
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 4.342

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.