| Literature DB >> 32699920 |
Tobias Wörner1,2, Kristian Thorborg3, Kate E Webster4, Anders Stålman5,6, Frida Eek7.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Psychological readiness may play an important role in the return to sport (RTS) process following hip arthroscopy (HA), but there are limited tools for the measurement of this construct. The aim of this study was to modify the Swedish version of the Anterior Cruciate Ligament-Return to Sport after Injury (ACL-RSI) scale for use in HA patients and evaluate its psychometric properties.Entities:
Keywords: Hip arthroscopy; Psychological readiness; Return to sports
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32699920 PMCID: PMC8038984 DOI: 10.1007/s00167-020-06157-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc ISSN: 0942-2056 Impact factor: 4.342
Fig. 1Patient flow into the study
Patient characteristics (N = 127)
| Age in years [mean (SD); range] | 34.3 (10.13); 17–60 |
| Gender [ | |
| Females | 31 (24.4) |
| Males | 96 (75.6) |
| HSAS pre-op ( | |
| Mean (SD) | 5.5 (1.9) |
| Median (IQR) | 5 (4–7) |
| Time since op (months) | |
| [Mean (SD); range] | 19.4 (10.4); 3–39 |
| [Median (IQR)] | 18.3 (10.8–25.9) |
| Arthroscopic procedure ( | |
| Cam resection [ | 109 (87.2) |
| Cam and pincer resection [ | 16 (12.8) |
HSAS 4 includes participation in recreational and competitive sports such as football, ice hockey, indoor sports (basketball, handball, and floorball), martial arts, and alpine sports
Patient scores and expert relevance score for individual Hip-RSI items
| Scale item | Patient scores | Relevance rating | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (SD) | Median (IQR) | Floor effect (%) | Ceiling effect (%) | Mean (SD) | Rated relevant (%) | |
| 1. | 61.6 (30.9) | 3 | 11 | 2.8 (1.1) | ||
| 2. | 45.9 (37.0) | 41.0 (7.3–85.8) | 12 | 10 | 3.3 (1.0) | 80.0 |
| 3. | 62.3 (31.8) | 4 | 14 | 3.0 (0.8) | 70.9 | |
| 4. | 59.1 (32.1) | 4 | 13 | 3.1 (0.9) | ||
| 5. | 66.1 (31.8) | 2 | 17 | |||
| 6. | 59.7 (33.9) | 6 | 12 | 2.7 (0.9) | ||
| 7. | 49.3 (34.7) | 48.0 (18.5–85.5) | 11 | 6 | 3.1 (0.9) | 76.4 |
| 8. | 60.3 (31.3) | 4 | 10 | 2.7 (0.9) | ||
| 9. | 52.7 (38.8) | 52.0 (13.8–97.0) | 11 | 20 | 3.4 (7.1) | 90.9 |
| 10. | 54.1 (35.0) | 50.0 (20.0–93.5) | 6 | 13 | 3.1 (0.8) | 74.1 |
| 11. | 3 | 15 | 2.8 (1.1) | 69.1 | ||
| 12. | 2 | 35 | ||||
Range of answer scores was 0–100 for all items. Final items with adequate relevance are marked in BOLD. Items to be omitted are marked in ITALICS. Respective patient scores as well as relevance rating underlying the decision to omit an item marked in ITALICS and underlined
Correlations [Pearson (95% CI)] between the Hip-RSI hip function
| 12-Item scale | 6-Item scale | |
|---|---|---|
| HAGOS sport | 0.69 (0.66–0.96) | 0.63 (0.56–0.87) |
| iHOT-12 | 0.75 (0.78–1.07) | 0.73 (0.72–1.01) |
HAGOS Hip and Groin Outcome Score, iHOT-12 International Hip Outcome Tool
Fig. 2Correlations between 12-item Hip-RSI (top row/blue) as well as 6-item Hip-RSI (bottom row/red) and HAGOS sport (left) as well as i-Hot 12 (right)
Fig. 3Patients’ (N = 127) Hip-RSI scores according to RTS-level
Differences in Hip-RSI groups between RTS groups
| Level of return to sports | Hip-RSI scores | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12-Item scale | 6-Item scale | |||
| Mean diff. (95% CI) | Mean diff. (95% CI) | |||
| Same sport: same perf. | ||||
| No sport/exercise | 54.8 (35.3 to 74.2) | < 0.001 | 51.4 (31.8 to 71.1) | < 0.001 |
| Different sport/exercise | 34.0 (19.8 to 48.1) | < 0.001 | 25.5 (11.2 to 39.8) | < 0.001 |
| Same sport: lower perf. | 24.5 (9.5 to 39.6) | < 0.001 | 18.6 (3.4 to 33.8) | 0.001 |
| Same sport: lower perf. | ||||
| No sport/exercise | 30.2 (11.6 to 48.8) | < 0.001 | 32.9 (14.1 to 51.6) | < 0.001 |
| Different sport/exercise | 9.4 (− 3.5 to 22.4) | n.s | 6.9 (− 6.2 to 20.0) | n.s |
| Different sport/exercise | ||||
| No sport/exercise | 20.8 (2.9 to 38.7) | 0.016 | 25.9 (7.9 to 44.0) | 0.002 |
Hip-RSI Hip return to sport following injury, per. performance