The patient scar assessment questionnaire: A reliable and valid patient-reported outcomes measure for linear scars

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

Volumn 123, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 1481-1489

  Durani, Piyush ^a   McGrouther, Duncan A ^a   Ferguson, Mark W ^a  

^a NORTHERN GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HUMAN; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SCAR FORMATION; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY; VALIDITY; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; HOSPITALIZATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; QUALITY OF LIFE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SCAR; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VALIDATION STUDY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CICATRIX; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 66549120306     PISSN: 00321052     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181a205de     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Ferguson MW, O'Kane S. Scar-free healing: From embryonic mechanisms to adult therapeutic intervention. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2004;359:839-850.
2. Bayat A, McGrouther DA, Ferguson MW. Skin scarring. BMJ. 2003;326:88-92.
3. Mustoe TA, Cooter RD, Gold MH, etal. International clinical recommendations on scar management. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;110:560-571.
4. O'Brien L, Pandit A. Silicon gel sheeting for preventing and treating hypertrophic and keloid scars. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;1:CD003826.
5. Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria. Qual Life Res. 2002;11:193-205.
6. Bendig AW, Hughes JB. Effectofamountofverbal anchoring and number of rating-scale categories upon transmitted information. J Exp Psychol. 1953;46:87-90.
7. Chang L. A psychometric evaluation of 4-point and 6-point Likert-type scales in relation to reliability and validity. Appl Psychol Meas. 1994;18:205-215.
8. Cicchetti DV, Showalter D, Tyrer PJ. The effect of number of rating scale categories on levels of interrater reliability: A Monte Carlo investigation. Appl Pyschol Meas. 1985;9:31-36.
9. McKelvie SJ. Graphic rating scales: How many categories? Br J Psychol. 1978;69:185-202.
10. Miller G. The magic number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol Rev. 1956;63:81-97.
11. Weng L-J. Impact of the number of response categories and anchor labels on coefficient alpha and test-retest reliability. Educ Psychol Meas. 2004;64:956-972.
12. Halpin G, Arbet S. Effects of number and type of response choices on internal consistency reliability. Percept Mot Skills 1994;79:928-930.
13. Beausang E, Floyd H, Dunn KW, Orton CI, Ferguson MW. A new quantitative scale for clinical scar assessment. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998;102:1954-1961.
14. Cano SJ, Browne JP, Lamping DL, Roberts AH, McGrouther DA, Black NA. The Patient Outcomes of Surgery-Hand/Arm (POS-Hand/Arm): A new patient-based outcome measure. J Hand Surg (Br.) 2004;29:477-485.
15. Lamping DL, Schroter S, Marquis P, Marrel A, Duprat-Lomon I, Sagnier PP. The community-acquired pneumonia symptom questionnaire: A new, patient-based outcome measure to evaluate symptoms in patients with community-acquired pneumonia. Chest 2002;122:920-929.
16. Lamping DL, Schroter S, Kurz X, Kahn SR, Abenhaim L. Evaluation of outcomes in chronic venous disorders of the leg: Development of a scientifically rigorous, patient-reported measure of symptoms and quality of life. J Vasc Surg. 2003;37:410-419.
17. Nunnally JC. Psychometric Theory. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1983.
18. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2003.