The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics? A systematic review

Acta Orthopaedica

Volumn 81, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 703-707

  Wamper, Kim E ^a   Sierevelt, Inger N ^a   Poolman, Rudolf W ^b   Bhandari, Mohit ^c   Haverkamp, Daniël ^a  

^a ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b ONZE LIEVE VROUWE GASTHUIS   (Netherlands)

^c MCMASTER UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTRE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COCHRANE LIBRARY; CONTENT VALIDITY; DATA ANALYSIS; DESCRIPTIVE RESEARCH; EMBASE; HARRIS HIP SCORE; HIP RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; MEDLINE; ORTHOPEDICS; OSTEOARTHRITIS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS;

ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH STATUS; HUMANS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 78649679708     PISSN: 17453674     EISSN: 17453682     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2010.537808     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. de Groot I B, Reijman M, Terwee C B, Bierma-Zeinstra S, Favejee M M, Roos E, Verhaar J A. Validation of the Dutch version of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17 (1): 132.
2. Gosens T, Hoefnagels N H, de Vet R C, Dhert W J, van Langelaan E J, Bul-stra S K, Geesink R G. The "Oxford Heup Score": the translation and validation of a questionnaire into Dutch to evaluate the results of total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2005; 76 (2): 204-11.
3. Harris W H. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 1969; 51 (4): 737-55.
4. Haverkamp D, Sierevelt I N, Bekerom van den M P, Poolman R W, Dijk van C N, Marti R K. The validity of patient satisfaction as single question in out-come measurement of total hip arthroplasty. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 2008; 18 (2): 145-50.
5. Kirmit L, Karatosun V, Unver B, Bakirhan S, Sen A, Gocen Z. The reliability of hip scoring systems for total hip arthroplasty candidates: assessment by physical therapists. Clin Rehabil 2005; 19 (6): 659-61.
6. McHorney C A, Tarlov A R. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res 1995; 4 (4): 293-307.
7. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epi-demiol 2009; 62 (10): 1006-12.
8. Ostendorf M, van Stel H F, Buskens E, Schrijvers A J, Marting L N, Verbout A J, Dhert W J. Patient-reported outcome in total hip replacement. A com-parison of fve instruments of health status. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 2004; 86 (6): 801-8.
9. Poolman R W, Swiontkowski M F, Fairbank J C, Schemitsch E H, Sprague S, de Vet H C. Outcome instruments: rationale for their use. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) (Suppl 3) 2009; 91: 41-9.
10. Ragab A A. Validity of self-assessment outcome questionnaires: patient-physician discrepancy in outcome interpretation. Biomed Sci Instrum 2003; 39: 579-84.
11. Roorda L D, Jones C A, Waltz M, Lankhorst G J, Bouter L M, van der Eijken J W, Willems W J, Heyligers I C, Voaklander D C, Kelly K D, Suarez-Alm-azor M E. Satisfactory cross cultural equivalence of the Dutch WOMAC in patients with hip osteoarthritis waiting for arthroplasty. Ann Rheum Dis 2004; 63 (1): 36-42.
12. Shi H Y, Mau L W, Chang J K, Wang J W, Chiu H C. Responsiveness of the Harris Hip Score and the SF-36: fve years after total hip arthroplasty. Qual Life Res 2009; 18 (8): 1053-60.
13. Soderman P, Malchau H. Is the Harris Hip Score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? Clin Orthop 2001; (384): 189-97.
14. Terwee C B, Bot S D, De Boer M R, van der Windt D A, Knol D L, Dekker J, Bouter L M, de Vet H C. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60 (1): 34-42.
15. Walter S D, Yao X. Effect sizes can be calculated for studies reporting ranges for outcome variables in systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60 (8): 849-52.
16. Wright J G, Young N L. A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50 (3): 239-46.