Validity, reliability and responsiveness of patient-reported outcome questionnaires when assessing hip and groin disability: A systematic review

British Journal of Sports Medicine

Volumn 44, Issue 16, 2010, Pages 1186-1196

  Thorborg, K ^a   Roos, E M ^b   Bartels, E M ^a   Petersen, J ^a   Holmich P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; DISABILITY; DISABLED PERSON; HIP; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HIP OSTEOARTHRITIS; HUMAN; INGUINAL HERNIA; INGUINAL REGION; MUSCULOSKELETAL PAIN; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMETRY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; REVIEW; STANDARD; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VALIDATION STUDY;

ACTIVITIES OF DAILY LIVING; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; DISABILITY EVALUATION; DISABLED PERSONS; GROIN; HERNIA, INGUINAL; HIP; HUMANS; MUSCULOSKELETAL PAIN; OSTEOARTHRITIS, HIP; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 78650146881     PISSN: 03063674     EISSN: 14730480     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bjsm.2009.060889     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. Rutkow IM, Robbins AW. Demographic, classificatory, and socioeconomic aspects of hernia repair in the United States. Surg Clin North Am 1993;73:413-26.
2. van der Waal JM, Bot SD, Terwee CB, et al. The course and prognosis of hip complaints in general practice. Ann Behav Med 2006;31:297-308.
3. Bay-Nielsen M, Perkins FM, Kehlet H; Danish Hernia Database. Pain and functional impairment 1 year after inguinal herniorrhaphy: a nationwide questionnaire study. Ann Surg 2001;233:1-7.
4. Picavet HS, Hoeymans N. Health related quality of life in multiple musculoskeletal diseases: SF-36 and EQ-5D in the DMC3 study. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:723-9.
5. Jansen JA, Mens JM, Backx FJ, et al. Treatment of longstanding groin pain in athletes: a systematic review. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2008;18:263-74.
6. Matthews RD, Neumayer L. Inguinal hernia in the 21st century: an evidencebased review. Curr Probl Surg 2008;45:261-312. (Pubitemid 351377563)
7. Standaert CJ, Manner PA, Herring SA. Expert opinion and controversies in musculoskeletal and sports medicine: femoroacetabular impingement. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008;89:890-3.
8. Patrick DL, Burke LB, Powers JH, et al. Patient-reported outcomes to support medical product labeling claims: FDA perspective. Value Health 2007;10(Suppl 2):S125-37.
9. Bot SD, Terwee CB, van der Windt DA, et al. Clinimetric evaluation of shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:335-41.
10. de Boer MR, Moll AC, de Vet HC, et al. Psychometric properties of vision-related quality of life questionnaires: a systematic review. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 2004;24:257-73.
11. Eechaute C, Vaes P, Van Aerschot L, et al. The clinimetric qualities of patientassessed instruments for measuring chronic ankle instability: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2007;8:6.
12. Veenhof C, Bijlsma JW, van den Ende CH, et al. Psychometric evaluation of osteoarthritis questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Arthritis Rheum 2006;55:480-92. (Pubitemid 43890904)
13. Garratt A, Schmidt L, Mackintosh A, et al. Quality of life measurement: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. BMJ 2002;324:1417.
14. Burns AWR, Bourne RB. Economics of revision total hip arthroplasty. Curr Orthop 2006;20:203-7.
15. Falvey EC, Franklyn-Miller A, McCrory PR. The groin triangle: a patho-anatomical approach to the diagnosis of chronic groin pain in athletes. Br J Sports Med 2009;43:213-20.
16. Bradshaw CJ, Bundy M, Falvey E. The diagnosis of longstanding groin pain: a prospective clinical cohort study. Br J Sports Med 2008;42:551-4.
17. Hölmich P. Long-standing groin pain in sportspeople falls into three primary patterns, a "clinical entity" approach: a prospective study of 207 patients. Br J Sports Med 2007;41:247-52; discussion 252.
18. Lesher JM, Dreyfuss P, Hager N, et al. Hip joint pain referral patterns: a descriptive study. Pain Med 2008;9:22-5.
19. Philippon MJ, Maxwell RB, Johnston TL, et al. Clinical presentation of femoroacetabular impingement. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2007;15:1041-7.
20. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Item response theory. In: Streiner DL, Norman GR eds. Health measurement scales. a practical guide to their development and use, Chapter 12, 4th edn. New York, USA: Oxford, 2008:299-330.
21. US Food and Drug Administration. Guidance for Industry. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims. Draft guidance, 2006.
22. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva, 2001.
23. Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reports of metaanalyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Lancet 1999; 354:1896-900.
24. van Tulder M, Furlan A, Bombardier C, et al.; Editorial Board of the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine 2003;28:1290-9.
25. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:34-42.
26. Altman DG. Some common problems in medical research. In: Altman DG ed. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall, 1991:396-439.
27. Wright JG, Young NL. The patient-specific index: asking patients what they want. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1997;79:974-83.
28. Wright JG, Young NL. A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 1997;50:239-46.
29. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, et al. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996;78:185-90. (Pubitemid 26096988)
30. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, et al. Comparison of measures to assess outcomes in total hip replacement surgery. Qual Health Care 1996;5:81-8.
31. Fitzpatrick R, Dawson J. Health-related quality of life and the assessment of outcomes of total hip replacement surgery. Psychol Health 1997;12:793-803. (Pubitemid 127538603)
32. Stucki G, Meier D, Stucki S, et al. [Evaluation of a German questionnaire version of the Lequesne cox- and gonarthrosis indices]. Z Rheumatol 1996;55:50-7.
33. Stucki G, Sangha O, Stucki S, et al. Comparison of the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) osteoarthritis index and a self-report format of the self-administered Lequesne-Algofunctional index in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 1998;6:79-86.
34. Stucki G, Meier D, Stucki S, et al. [Evaluation of a German version of WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) Arthrosis Index]. Z Rheumatol 1996;55:40-9.
35. Klässbo M, Larsson E, Mannevik E. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score. An extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol 2003;32:46-51.
36. Christensen CP, Althausen PL, Mittleman MA, et al. The nonarthritic hip score: reliable and validated. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003;75-83.
37. Wright JG, Rudicel S, Feinstein AR. Ask patients what they want. Evaluation of individual complaints before total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1994;76:229-34.
38. Martin RL, Kelly BT, Philippon MJ. Evidence of validity for the hip outcome score. Arthroscopy 2006;22:1304-11.
39. Liang MH, Katz JN, Phillips C, et al. The total hip arthroplasty outcome evaluation form of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Results of a nominal group process. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Task Force on Outcome Studies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1991;73A:639-46.
40. Dawson J, Linsell L, Doll H, et al. Assessment of the Lequesne index of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip in an elderly population. Osteoarthr Cartil 2005;13:854-60.
41. Nilsdotter AK, Lohmander LS, Klässbo M, et al. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS)-validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2003;4:10.
42. Martin RL, Philippon MJ. Evidence of validity for the hip outcome score in hip arthroscopy. Arthroscopy 2007;23:822-6.
43. de Groot IB, Reijman M, Terwee CB, et al. Validation of the Dutch version of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Osteoarthr Cartil 2007;15:104-9.
44. Ludwig FJ, Melzer Ch, Grimmig H, et al. [Cross cultural adaptation of the lequesne algofunctional indices for german speaking patients with osteoarthritis of the hip and the knee]. Rehabilitation (Stuttg) 2002;41:249-57.
45. Potter BK, Freedman BA, Andersen RC, et al. Correlation of Short Form-36 and disability status with outcomes of arthroscopic acetabular labral debridement. Am J Sports Med 2005;33:864-70.
46. Naal FD, Sieverding M, Impellizzeri FM, et al. Reliability and validity of the cross-culturally adapted german oxford hip score. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009;467:952-7.
47. Roorda LD, Jones CA, Waltz M, et al. Satisfactory cross cultural equivalence of the Dutch WOMAC in patients with hip osteoarthritis waiting for arthroplasty. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:36-42.
48. Ostendorf M, van Stel HF, Buskens E, et al. Patient-reported outcome in total hip replacement. A comparison of five instruments of health status. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2004;86:801-8.
49. Garbuz DS, Xu M, Sayre EC. Patients' outcome after total hip arthroplasty: a comparison between the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities index and the Oxford 12-item hip score. J Arthroplasty 2006;21:998-1004.
50. Söderman P, Malchau H. Validity and reliability of Swedish WOMAC osteoarthritis index: a self-administered disease-specific questionnaire (WOMAC) versus generic instruments (SF-36 and NHP). Acta Orthop Scand 2000;71:39-46.
51. Quintana JM, Escobar A, Bilbao A, et al. Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after hip joint replacement. Osteoarthr Cartil 2005;13:1076-83.
52. Martin RL, Philippon MJ. Evidence of reliability and responsiveness for the hip outcome score. Arthroscopy 2008;24:676-82.
53. Johanson NA, Charlson ME, Szatrowski TP, et al. A self-administered hip-rating questionnaire for the assessment of outcome after total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1992;74:587-97.
54. Gosens T, Hoefnagels NH, de Vet RC, et al. The "Oxford Heup Score": the translation and validation of a questionnaire into Dutch to evaluate the results of total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2005;76:204-11.
55. Wright JG, Young NL, Waddell JP. The reliability and validity of the selfreported patient-specific index for total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2000;82:829-37.
56. Soininen JV, Paavolainen PO, Gronblad MA, et al. Validation study of a Finnish version of the Western Ontario and McMasters University osteoarthritis index. Hip Int 2008;18:108-11.
57. Kirmit L, Karatosun V, Unver B, et al. The reliability of hip scoring systems for total hip arthroplasty candidates: assessment by physical therapists. Clin Rehabil 2005;19:659-61.
58. Riddle DL, Stratford PW, Bowman DH. Findings of extensive variation in the types of outcome measures used in hip and knee replacement clinical trials: a systematic review. Arthritis Rheum 2008;59:876-83.
59. Huch K, Müller KA, Stürmer T, et al. Sports activities 5 years after total knee or hip arthroplasty: the Ulm Osteoarthritis Study. Ann Rheum Dis 2005;64:1715-20.
60. McConnell S, Kolopack P, Davis AM. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC): a review of its utility and measurement properties. Arthritis Rheum 2001;45:453-61.
61. Sun Y, Stürmer T, Günther KP, et al. Reliability and validity of clinical outcome measurements of osteoarthritis of the hip and knee-a review of the literature. Clin Rheumatol 1997;16:185-98.
62. Jolles BM, Buchbinder R, Beaton DE. A study compared nine patient-specific indices for musculoskeletal disorders. J Clin Epidemiol 2005;58:791-801.
63. Stavem K, Arnesen ø. Use of hip and knee clinical scoring systems in prosthesis surgery in Norwegian hospitals. Int Orthop 2005;29:301-4.
64. Byrd JW, Jones KS. Arthroscopic femoroplasty in the management of cam-type femoroacetabular impingement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009;467:739-46.
65. Philippon MJ, Briggs KK, Yen YM, et al. Outcomes following hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement with associated chondrolabral dysfunction: minimum two-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009;91:16-23.
66. Bardakos NV, Vasconcelos JC, Villar RN. Early outcome of hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement: the role of femoral osteoplasty in symptomatic improvement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2008;90:1570-5.
67. Robertson WJ, Kadrmas WR, Kelly BT. Arthroscopic management of labral tears in the hip: a systematic review of the literature. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007;455:88-92.
68. Hölmich P, Uhrskou P, Ulnits L, et al. Effectiveness of active physical training as treatment for long-standing adductor-related groin pain in athletes: randomised trial. Lancet 1999;353:439-43.
69. McHorney CA, Cohen AS. Equating health status measures with item response theory: illustrations with functional status items. Med Care 2000;38:II43-59.
70. Davis AM, Perruccio AV, Canizares M, et al. The development of a short measure of physical function for hip OA HOOS-Physical Function Shortform (HOOS-PS): an OARSI/OMERACT initiative. Osteoarthr Cartil 2008;16:551-9.
71. Bombardier C, Tugwell P. Methodological considerations in functional assessment. J Rheumatol Suppl 1987;14(Suppl 15):6-10.
72. Lohr KN, Aaronson NK, Alonso J, et al. Evaluating quality-of-life and health status instruments: development of scientific review criteria. Clin Ther 1996;18:979-92.
73. Montin L, Leino-Kilpi H, Suominen T, et al. A systematic review of empirical studies between 1966 and 2005 of patient outcomes of total hip arthroplasty and related factors. J Clin Nurs 2008;17:40-5.
74. Olivo SA, Macedo LG, Gadotti IC, et al. Scales to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. Phys Ther 2008;88:156-75.
75. Franneby U, Gunnarsson U, Andersson M, et al. Validation of an Inguinal Pain Questionnaire for assessment of chronic pain after groin hernia repair. Br J Surg 2008;95:488-93.
76. Lequesne MG, Mery C, Samson M, et al. Indexes of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Validation - value in comparison with other assessment tests. Scand J Rheumatol Suppl 1987;65:85-9.
77. Fitzpatrick R, Morris R, Hajat S, et al. The value of short and simple measures to assess outcomes for patients of total hip replacement surgery. Qual Health Care 2000;9:146-50.
78. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Frost S, et al. Evidence for the validity of a patientbased instrument for assessment of outcome after revision hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001;83:1125-9.
79. Whitehouse SL, Lingard EA, Katz JN, et al. Development and testing of a reduced WOMAC function scale. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003;85:706-11.
80. Katz JN, Phillips CB, Poss R, et al. The validity and reliability of a Total Hip Arthroplasty Outcome Evaluation Questionnaire. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995;77:1528-34.
81. Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Steiner W, et al. Responsiveness of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index as compared with the SF-36 in patients with osteoarthritis of the legs undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation intervention. Ann Rheum Dis 2001;60:834-40.
82. Nilsdotter AK, Roos EM, Westerlund JP, et al. Comparative responsiveness of measures of pain and function after total hip replacement. Arthritis Rheum 2001;45:258-62.
83. Escobar A, Quintana JM, Bilbao A, et al. Validation of the Spanish version of the WOMAC questionnaire for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Clin Rheumatol 2002;21:466-71.
84. Soohoo NF, Vyas RM, Samimi DB, et al. Comparison of the responsiveness of the SF-36 and WOMAC in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2007;22:1168-73.