Skip to main content
Top
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research 9/2013

01-11-2013 | Brief Communication

Comparison of the responsiveness of the SF-36, the Oxford Knee Score, and the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in patients undergoing total knee replacement

Auteurs: Yu Ko, Ngai-Nung Lo, Seng-Jin Yeo, Kuang-Ying Yang, William Yeo, Hwei-Chi Chong, Julian Thumboo

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 9/2013

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the responsiveness of the Knee Society (KS) Clinical Rating System, the general health status measure Short Form 36 (SF-36), and both the raw and Rasch-based scores of the condition-specific Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in patients undergoing total knee replacement (TKR)

Methods

Data were prospectively collected as part of routine care from adult patients who underwent TKR between 2001 and 2006. OKS data fit the Rasch partial credit model after removing items regarding limping and kneeling. Responsiveness was assessed using effect size (ES), standardised response mean (SRM), and relative validity (RV).

Results

Among 702 patients with complete data at baseline and two follow-ups, the pain subscale of the KS (KS-P), raw-OKS, and Rasch-OKS consistently had higher levels of responsiveness than all eight SF-36 and the other KS subscales. At 6-month follow-up, Rasch-OKS had the largest ES and KS-P had the largest SRM (2.7 and 2.0, respectively). When compared to raw-OKS, the RVs of KS-P, Rasch-OKS, SF-36 bodily pain, and SF-36 physical functioning were 1.1, 0.66, 0.49, and 0.36, respectively. A similar ordering of responsiveness was observed at 24-month follow-up.

Conclusion

The OKS and KS-P are more responsive than most SF-36 subscales in TKR patients. Raw-OKS and Rasch-OKS have comparable responsiveness. Different responsiveness indices may give different results.
Literatuur
1.
go back to reference Callahan, C. M., Drake, B. G., Heck, D. A., & Dittus, R. S. (1994). Patient outcomes following tricompartmental total knee replacement. A meta-analysis. JAMA, 271, 1349–1357.PubMedCrossRef Callahan, C. M., Drake, B. G., Heck, D. A., & Dittus, R. S. (1994). Patient outcomes following tricompartmental total knee replacement. A meta-analysis. JAMA, 271, 1349–1357.PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Escobar, A., Quintana, J. M., Bilbao, A., Arostegui, I., Lafuente, I., & Vidaurreta, I. (2007). Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 15, 273–280.PubMedCrossRef Escobar, A., Quintana, J. M., Bilbao, A., Arostegui, I., Lafuente, I., & Vidaurreta, I. (2007). Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 15, 273–280.PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Lingard, E. A., Katz, J. N., Wright, R. J., Wright, E. A., & Sledge, C. B. (2001). Kinemax outcomes group. Validity and responsiveness of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in comparison with the SF-36 and WOMAC. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American, 83-A, 1856–1864. Lingard, E. A., Katz, J. N., Wright, R. J., Wright, E. A., & Sledge, C. B. (2001). Kinemax outcomes group. Validity and responsiveness of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in comparison with the SF-36 and WOMAC. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American, 83-A, 1856–1864.
4.
go back to reference Bachmeier, C. J., March, L. M., Cross, M. J., Lapsley, H. M., Tribe, K. L., Courtenay, B. G., et al. (2001). A comparison of outcomes in osteoarthritis patients undergoing total hip and knee replacement surgery. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 9, 137–146.PubMedCrossRef Bachmeier, C. J., March, L. M., Cross, M. J., Lapsley, H. M., Tribe, K. L., Courtenay, B. G., et al. (2001). A comparison of outcomes in osteoarthritis patients undergoing total hip and knee replacement surgery. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 9, 137–146.PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Insall, J. N., Dorr, L. D., Scott, R. D., & Scott, W. N. (1989). Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 248, 13–14.PubMed Insall, J. N., Dorr, L. D., Scott, R. D., & Scott, W. N. (1989). Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 248, 13–14.PubMed
6.
go back to reference Ware, J. E, Jr., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483. Ware, J. E, Jr., & Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care, 30, 473–483.
7.
go back to reference Garratt, A. M., Brealey, S., & Gillespie, W. J. (2004). Patient-assessed health instruments for the knee: A structured review. Rheumatology (Oxford), 43, 1414–1423.CrossRef Garratt, A. M., Brealey, S., & Gillespie, W. J. (2004). Patient-assessed health instruments for the knee: A structured review. Rheumatology (Oxford), 43, 1414–1423.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Dawson, J., Fitzpatrick, R., Murray, D., & Carr, A. (1998). Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 80, 63–69.CrossRef Dawson, J., Fitzpatrick, R., Murray, D., & Carr, A. (1998). Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume, 80, 63–69.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Thumboo, J., Fong, K. Y., Machin, D., Chan, S. P., Leon, K. H., Feng, P. H., et al. (2001). A community-based study of scaling assumptions and construct validity of the English (UK) and Chinese (HK) SF-36 in Singapore. Quality of Life Research, 10, 175–188.PubMedCrossRef Thumboo, J., Fong, K. Y., Machin, D., Chan, S. P., Leon, K. H., Feng, P. H., et al. (2001). A community-based study of scaling assumptions and construct validity of the English (UK) and Chinese (HK) SF-36 in Singapore. Quality of Life Research, 10, 175–188.PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Xie, F., Li, S. C., Lo, N. N., Yeo, S. J., Yang, K. Y., Yeo, W., et al. (2007). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Singapore English and Chinese versions of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in knee osteoarthritis patients undergoing total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 15, 1019–1024.PubMedCrossRef Xie, F., Li, S. C., Lo, N. N., Yeo, S. J., Yang, K. Y., Yeo, W., et al. (2007). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Singapore English and Chinese versions of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in knee osteoarthritis patients undergoing total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 15, 1019–1024.PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Ko, Y., Lo, N. N., Yeo, S. J., Yang, K. Y., Yeo, W., Chong, H. C., et al. (2009). Rasch analysis of the Oxford Knee Score. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 17, 1163–1169.PubMedCrossRef Ko, Y., Lo, N. N., Yeo, S. J., Yang, K. Y., Yeo, W., Chong, H. C., et al. (2009). Rasch analysis of the Oxford Knee Score. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 17, 1163–1169.PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Chang, W. C., & Chan, C. (1995). Rasch analysis for outcomes measures: Some methodological considerations. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 76, 934–939.PubMedCrossRef Chang, W. C., & Chan, C. (1995). Rasch analysis for outcomes measures: Some methodological considerations. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 76, 934–939.PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Quintana, J. M., Escobar, A., Bilbao, A., Arostegui, I., Lafuente, I., & Vidaurreta, I. (2005). Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after hip joint replacement. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 13, 1076–1083.PubMedCrossRef Quintana, J. M., Escobar, A., Bilbao, A., Arostegui, I., Lafuente, I., & Vidaurreta, I. (2005). Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after hip joint replacement. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 13, 1076–1083.PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Soohoo, N. F., Vyas, R. M., Samimi, D. B., Molina, R., & Lieberman, J. R. (2007). Comparison of the responsiveness of the SF-36 and WOMAC in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Journal of Arthroplasty, 22, 1168–1173.PubMedCrossRef Soohoo, N. F., Vyas, R. M., Samimi, D. B., Molina, R., & Lieberman, J. R. (2007). Comparison of the responsiveness of the SF-36 and WOMAC in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Journal of Arthroplasty, 22, 1168–1173.PubMedCrossRef
Metagegevens
Titel
Comparison of the responsiveness of the SF-36, the Oxford Knee Score, and the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in patients undergoing total knee replacement
Auteurs
Yu Ko
Ngai-Nung Lo
Seng-Jin Yeo
Kuang-Ying Yang
William Yeo
Hwei-Chi Chong
Julian Thumboo
Publicatiedatum
01-11-2013
Uitgeverij
Springer Netherlands
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 9/2013
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0376-y

Andere artikelen Uitgave 9/2013

Quality of Life Research 9/2013 Naar de uitgave