Ertan Şahinoğlu1, Gülbin Ergin2, Bayram Ünver3. 1. Dr. İsmail Atabek Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation Center, Kahramanlar Mah. Can Kulduk Sok. No: 16 Konak, Izmir, Turkey. ertan.sahinoglu@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Health Science Faculty, European University of Lefke, Lefke, North Cyprus. 3. School of Physical Therapy and Rehabilitation, Dokuz Eylul University, Mithatpasa Cad. No:56/15, Balcova, 35340, Izmir, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of self-administered patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires which were used in non-surgical homogeneous populations with musculoskeletal shoulder disorders. METHODS: The included studies were identified using eligibility criteria. The methodological quality of each article was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. The psychometric properties of original versions and translated versions of PROs were also assessed. RESULTS: Twenty articles were included. Two musculoskeletal shoulder disorders were identified that met the selection criteria: rotator cuff disease and glenohumeral instability. A total of 11 PROs were identified. In general, the methodological quality of the included studies is fair or poor. The Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) are the most frequently evaluated PROs for patients with rotator cuff disease, and their psychometric properties seem to vary according to what language that they are in. For glenohumeral instability, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) and the Oxford Instability Shoulder Score (OISS) are the most frequently evaluated PROs, and their psychometric properties seem to be adequate. CONCLUSION: Using for rotator cuff disease is advised, for Norwegian users, the SPADI, WORC, Oxford Shoulder Score, and disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand. Dutch and Persian users could use the WORC. For Greek speakers, the SPADI is recommended. Turkish users could use the rotator cuff quality-of-life measure. For glenohumeral instability, Dutch and Norwegian speakers could use the WOSI and the OISS. Italian, Japanese, and Turkish users could use the WOSI. For English users, the OISS and the Shoulder Rating Questionnaire are recommended. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the psychometric properties of self-administered patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires which were used in non-surgical homogeneous populations with musculoskeletal shoulder disorders. METHODS: The included studies were identified using eligibility criteria. The methodological quality of each article was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. The psychometric properties of original versions and translated versions of PROs were also assessed. RESULTS: Twenty articles were included. Two musculoskeletal shoulder disorders were identified that met the selection criteria: rotator cuff disease and glenohumeral instability. A total of 11 PROs were identified. In general, the methodological quality of the included studies is fair or poor. The Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) are the most frequently evaluated PROs for patients with rotator cuff disease, and their psychometric properties seem to vary according to what language that they are in. For glenohumeral instability, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) and the Oxford Instability Shoulder Score (OISS) are the most frequently evaluated PROs, and their psychometric properties seem to be adequate. CONCLUSION: Using for rotator cuff disease is advised, for Norwegian users, the SPADI, WORC, Oxford Shoulder Score, and disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand. Dutch and Persian users could use the WORC. For Greek speakers, the SPADI is recommended. Turkish users could use the rotator cuff quality-of-life measure. For glenohumeral instability, Dutch and Norwegian speakers could use the WOSI and the OISS. Italian, Japanese, and Turkish users could use the WOSI. For English users, the OISS and the Shoulder Rating Questionnaire are recommended. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Authors: J J Luime; B W Koes; I J M Hendriksen; A Burdorf; A P Verhagen; H S Miedema; J A N Verhaar Journal: Scand J Rheumatol Date: 2004 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: Yining Lu; Alexander Beletsky; Benedict U Nwachukwu; Bhavik H Patel; Kelechi R Okoroha; Nikhil Verma; Brian Cole; Brian Forsythe Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Date: 2020-10-24