Comparative responsiveness and minimal change for the Oxford Elbow Score following surgery

Quality of Life Research

Volumn 17, Issue 10, 2008, Pages 1257-1267

  Dawson, Jill ^a   Doll, Helen ^a   Boller, Irene ^a   Fitzpatrick, Ray ^a   Little, Christopher ^b   Rees, Jonathan ^b   Carr, Andrew ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^b NUFFIELD ORTHOPAEDIC CENTRE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Elbow; Minimal clinically important difference; Minimal detectable change; Outcomes assessment; Patient reported outcome measures; Responsiveness; Surgery

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; CONFERENCE PAPER; EFFECT SIZE; ELBOW; EPICONDYLITIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HOSPITAL CARE; HUMAN; INJURY SCALE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY; OSTEOARTHRITIS; OXFORD ELBOW SCORE; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; POSTTRAUMATIC COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUESTIONNAIRE; RATING SCALE; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RHEUMATOID ARTHRITIS; RIGIDITY; SAMPLE SIZE; TREATMENT RESPONSE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ELBOW; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUESTIONNAIRES; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 57449086824     PISSN: 09629343     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-008-9409-3     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (40)

1. Pynsent, P., Fairbank, J. C. T., & Carr, A. (1993). Outcome measures in orthopaedics. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.
2. J Dawson R Fitzpatrick D Murray A Carr 1996 The problem of 'noise' in monitoring patient-based outcomes: generic, disease-specific and site-specific instruments for total hip replacement Journal of Health Services Research & Policy 1 224 231
3. J Dawson R Fitzpatrick A Carr D Murray 1996 Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume 78 185 190
4. J Dawson R Fitzpatrick D Murray A Carr 1998 Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume 80 63 69 10.1302/0301-620X.80B1.7859
5. J Dawson R Fitzpatrick A Carr 1996 Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume 78 593 600
6. J Dawson R Fitzpatrick A Carr 1999 The assessment of shoulder instability. The development and validation of a questionnaire The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume 81 420 426
7. Khan, F., Ng, L., Gonzalez, S., Hale, T., & Turner-Stokes, L. (2008). Multidisciplinary rehabilitation programmes following joint replacement at the hip and knee in chronic arthropathy. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Online : Update Software), 2:CD004957. Review.
8. W Huber JG Hofstaetter B Hanslik-Schnabel M Posch C Wurnig 2004 The German version of the Oxford Shoulder Score-cross-cultural adaptation and validation Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 124 531 536 10.1007/s00402-004-0716-z
9. Canterbury District Health Board (DHB) (2007) New Zealand National Joint Register. Home page at: http://www.cdhb.govt.nz/NJR/. Canterbury DHB, New Zealand.
10. PL Hudak PC Amadio C Bombardier 1996 Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG) American Journal of Industrial Medicine 29 602 608 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:6<602::AID- AJIM4>3.0.CO;2-L Published erratum appears in Am J Ind Med 1996 Sep;30(3):372
11. GJW King RR Richards JD Zuckerman R Blasier C Dillman RJ Friedman 1999 A standardized method for assessment of elbow function Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 8 351 354 10.1016/S1058-2746(99)90159-3
12. TJ Overend JL Wuori-Fearn JF Kramer JC MacDermid 1999 Reliability of a patient-rated forearm evaluation questionnaire for patients with lateral epicondylitis Journal of Hand Therapy 12 31 37
13. P Sathyamoorthy GJ Kemp V Rawal V Rayner SP Frostick 2004 Development and validation of an elbow score Rheumatology (Oxford) 43 1434 1440 10.1093/rheumatology/keh367
14. J Dawson H Doll I Boller R Fitzpatrick C Little J Rees 2008 The development and validation of a patient-reported questionnaire to assess outcomes of elbow surgery The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume 90 466 473 10.1302/0301-620X.90B4.20290
15. DE Beaton 2000 Understanding the relevance of measured change through studies of responsiveness Spine 25 3192 3199 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00015
16. CB Terwee FW Dekker WM Wiersinga MF Prummel PMM Bossuyt 2003 On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation Quality of Life Research 12 349 362 10.1023/A: 1023499322593
17. G Guyatt S Walter G Norman 1987 Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments Journal of Chronic Diseases 40 171 178 10.1016/0021-9681(87)90069-5
18. MH Liang 2000 Longitudinal construct validity: establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments Medical Care 38 II84 II90 10.1097/00005650-200009002-00013
19. RD Hays D Hadorn 1992 Responsiveness to change: an aspect of validity, not a separate dimension Quality of Life Research 1 73 75 10.1007/BF00435438
20. KW Wyrwich WM Tierney FD Wolinsky 1999 Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 52 861 873 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00071-2
21. R Jaeschke J Singer GH Guyatt 1989 Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference Controlled Clinical Trials 10 407 415 10.1016/0197-2456(89)90005-6
22. Fayers, P. M., & Machin, D. (2000). Quality of life: assessment, analysis and interpretation. Chichester: Wiley.
23. HC de Vet CB Terwee RW Ostelo H Beckerman DL Knol LM Bouter 2006 Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 4 54 10.1186/1477-7525-4-54
24. RA Deyo RM Centor 1986 Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance Journal of Chronic Diseases 39 897 906 10.1016/0021-9681(86)90038-X
25. D Revicki RD Hays D Cella J Sloan 2008 Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 61 102 109 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.03.012
26. SPSS Inc. (2007) SPSS statistical software: release 15.0. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.
27. StataCorp. (2007). Stata statistical software: release 10. College Station, TX: StataCorp.
28. LE Kazis JJ Anderson RF Meenan 1989 Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status Medical Care 27 S178 S189 10.1097/00005650-198903001-00015
29. Cohen, J. (1997). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. New York: Academic Press.
30. JA Hanley BJ McNeil 1983 A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases Radiology 148 839 843
31. DL Riddle PW Stratford JM Binkley 1998 Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: part 2 Physical Therapy 78 1197 1207
32. PW Stratford JM Binkley DL Riddle 1996 Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores Physical Therapy 76 1109 1123
33. DE Beaton JN Katz AH Fossel JG Wright V Tarasuk C Bombardier 2001 Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity Journal of Hand Therapy 14 128 146
34. FM Kovacs V Abraira A Royuela J Corcoll L Alegre M Tomás 2008 Minimum detectable and minimal clinically important changes for pain in patients with nonspecific neck pain BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 9 43 10.1186/1471-2474-9-43
35. DM Kennedy PW Stratford J Wessel JD Gollish D Penney 2005 Assessing stability and change of four performance measures: a longitudinal study evaluating outcome following total hip and knee arthroplasty BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 6 3 10.1186/1471-2474-6-3
36. P Diehr L Chen D Patrick Z Feng Y Yasui 2005 Reliability, effect size, and responsiveness of health status measures in the design of randomized and cluster-randomized trials Contemporary Clinical Trials 26 45 58 10.1016/j.cct.2004.11.014
37. J Sloan T Symonds D Vargas-Chanes B Fridley 2003 Practical guidelines for assessing the clinical significance of health-related quality of life changes within clinical trials Drug Information Journal 37 23 31
38. GR Norman JA Sloan KW Wyrwich 2003 Interpretation of changes in health-related quality of life: the remarkable universality of half a standard deviation Medical Care 41 582 592 10.1097/00005650-200305000-00004
39. GH Guyatt EF Juniper SD Walter LE Griffith RS Goldstein 1998 Interpreting treatment effects in randomised trials BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) 316 690 693
40. G Guyatt H Schunemann 2007 How can quality of life researchers make their work more useful to health workers and their patients? Quality of Life Research 16 1097 1105 10.1007/s11136-007-9223-3