Health-related quality of life following podiatric surgery

Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association

Volumn 91, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 164-173

  Bennett, Paul J ^a   Patterson, Carla ^a   Dunne, Michael P ^a  

^a QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUSTRALIA; FEMALE; FOOT; HEALTH STATUS; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PAIN; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PODIATRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; STANDARD;

ADULT; AGED; AUSTRALIA; FEMALE; FOOT; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PAIN; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PODIATRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 0035319459     PISSN: 87507315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7547/87507315-91-4-164     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. SELLA EJ: More on podiatric and orthopedic surgery. Conn Med 54: 170, 1990.
2. YALE JF: Surgery by non-surgeons. Conn Med 53: 755, 1989.
3. RUSSELL JC: Surgery by non-surgeons: podiatric surgery in Connecticut. Conn Med 53: 509, 1989.
4. PETERSON KS: "Podiatrist or orthopaedist?" USA Today. April 14, 1996.
5. ROWLANDS B: Podiatrists toe college line. Hospital Doctor. April 29, 1993: 18.
6. SALTZMAN CL, DOMSIC RT, BAUMHAUER JF, ET AL: Foot and ankle research priority: report from the Research Council of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society. Foot Ankle Int 18: 447, 1997.
7. BLIGH G, RICE M: Podiatry: whose best foot forward? Lancet 350 (suppl 3): SIII21, 1997.
8. DEYO RA: Outcome research and outcomes management for quality assurance. J Bone Joint Surg Br 75 (suppl II-III): 124, 1996.
9. MARSHALL DJ: Success, standards and the future. J Bone Joint Surg Br 78 (suppl II-III): 113, 1996.
10. MCPHEE B: Orthopaedic audit: the whys and wherefores. J Bone Joint Surg Br 78 (suppl II-III): 124, 1996.
11. WARE JE, SNYDER MK, WRIGHT WR, ET AL: Defining and measuring patient satisfaction with medical care. Eval Program Plann 6: 247, 1983.
12. PASCOE GC, ATTKISSON CC: The evaluation ranking scale: a new methodology for assessing satisfaction. Eval Program Plann 6: 335, 1983.
13. LARSEN DL, ATTKISSON CC, HARGRAVES WA, ET AL: Assessment of client/patient satisfaction: development of a general scale. Eval Program Plann 2: 197, 1979.
14. ROBERTS RE, PASCOE GC, ATTKISSON CC: Relationship of service satisfaction to life satisfaction and perceived well-being. Eval Program Plann 6: 373, 1983.
15. SHARMA L, SINACORE J, DAUGHERTY C, ET AL: Prognostic factors for the functional outcome of total knee replacement: a prospective study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 51: M152, 1996.
16. DAWSON J, FITZPATRICK R, CARR A: Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 78: 593, 1996.
17. HAWKER G, MELFI C, PAUL J, ET AL: Comparison of a generic (SF-36) and disease specific (WOMAC) instrument in the measurement of outcomes after knee replacement surgery. J Rheumatol 22: 1193, 1995.
18. KITAOKA HB, PATZER GL: Analysis of clinical grading scales for the foot and ankle. Foot Ankle Int 18: 443, 1997.
19. TESAR P: Health Outcomes and Cardiovascular Disease. Managing and Measuring Health Outcomes: From Policy to Practice, Australian Health Outcomes Collaboration, Canberra, Australia, 1998.
20. BENNETT PJ, PATTERSON C, WEARING SC, ET AL: Development and validation of a questionnaire designed to measure foot health status. JAPMA 88: 419, 1998.
21. BUDIMAN-MAK E, CONRAD KJ, ROACH KE: The Foot Function Index: a measure of foot pain and disability. J Clin Epidemiol 44: 561, 1991.
22. SAAG KG, SALTZMAN CL, RICE-BROWN C, ET AL: The Foot Function Index for measuring rheumatoid arthritis pain: evaluating side-to-side reliability. Foot Ankle Int 17: 506, 1996.