Responsiveness and validity of the SF-36, Ankle osteoarthritis scale, AOFAS ankle hindfoot score, and foot function index in end stage ankle arthritis

Foot and Ankle International

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 57-63

  Madeley, N Jane ^a   Wing, Kevin J ^a   Topliss, Claire ^a   Penner, Murray J ^a   Glazebrook, Mark A ^a   Younger, Alastair S E ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

Endstage ankle arthritis; Outcome score

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AMERICAN ORTHOPAEDIC FOOT AND ANKLE SOCIETY; ANKLE ARTHROPLASTY; ANKLE HINDFOOT SCORE; ANKLE OSTEOARTHRITIS SCALE; ARTHRITIS; ARTICLE; END STAGE ANKLE ARTHRITIS; FEMALE; FOOT FUNCTION INDEX; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCORING SYSTEM; SHORT FORM 36; VALIDITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; FOOT JOINTS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PAIN MEASUREMENT; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84858302845     PISSN: 10711007     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3113/FAI.2012.0057     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Agel, J; Coetzee, JC; Sangeorzan, BJ; Roberts, MM; Hansen, ST: Reliability of the Foot Function Index: A report of the AOFAS Outcomes Committee. Foot Ankle In. 26(11):962-7, 2005.
2. Briggs, KK; Kocher, MS; Rodkey, WG; Steadman, JR: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Lysholm knee score and Tegner activity scale for patients with meniscal injury of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 88(4):698-705, 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.E.00339
3. Budiman-Mak, E; Conrad, K; Stuck, R; Matters, M: Theoretical model and Rasch analysis to develop a revised Foot Function Index. Foot Ankle Int. 27(7):519-27, 2006.
4. Budiman-Mak, E; Conrad, KJ; Roach, KE: The Foot Function Index: a measure of foot pain and disability. J Clin Epidemiol. 44(6):561-70, 1991. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(91)90220-4
5. Button, G; Pinney, S: A meta-analysis of outcome rating scales in foot and ankle surgery: is there a valid, reliable, and responsive system? Foot Ankle Int. 25(8):521-5, 2004.
6. Cohen, J: Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Edited, Hilldale, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1988.
7. Dawson, J; Doll, H; Boller, I; et al.: Comparative responsiveness and minimal change for the Oxford Elbow Score following surgery. Qual Life Res. 17(10):1257-67, 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9409-3
8. Domsic, RT; Saltzman, CL: Ankle osteoarthritis scale. Foot Ankle Int. 19(7):466-71, 1998.
9. Garratt, A; Schmidt, L; Mackintosh, A; Fitzpatrick, R: Quality of life measurement: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. BMJ. 324(7351):1417, 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.324.7351.1417
10. Guyton, GP: Theoretical limitations of the AOFAS scoring systems: an analysis using Monte Carlo modeling. Foot Ankle Int. 22(10):779-87, 2001.
11. Ibrahim, T; Beiri, A; Azzabi, M; et al.: Reliability and validity of the subjective component of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society clinical rating scales. J Foot Ankle Surg. 46(2):65-74, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/ j.jfas.2006.12.002
12. Jaglal, S; Lakhani, Z; Schatzker, J: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the lower extremity measure for patients with a hip fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 82-A(7):955-62, 2000.
13. Kitaoka, HB; Alexander, IJ; Adelaar, RS; et al.: Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes. Foot Ankle Int. 15(7):349-53, 1994.
14. Kocher, MS; Horan, MP; Briggs, KK; et al.: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons subjective shoulder scale in patients with shoulder instability, rotator cuff disease, and glenohumeral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 87(9):2006-11, 2005. http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.C.01624
15. Kocher, MS; Tucker, R; Briggs, KK: Relationship between subjective and objective assessment of outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. J Knee Surg. 18(1):73-81, 2005.
16. Lau, JT; Mahomed, NM; Schon, LC: Results of an Internet survey determining the most frequently used ankle scores by AOFAS members. Foot Ankle Int. 26(6):479-82, 2005.
17. Lingard, EA; Katz, JN; Wright, RJ; Wright, EA; Sledge, CB: Validity and responsiveness of the Knee Society Clinical Rating System in comparison with the SF-36 and WOMAC. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 83-A(12):1856-64, 2001.
18. Martin, RL; Irrgang, JJ: A survey of self-reported outcome instruments for the foot and ankle. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 37(2):72-84, 2007. http://dx.doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2007.2403
19. McCarthy, CJ; Oldham, JA: The reliability, validity and responsiveness of an aggregated locomotor function (ALF) score in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology (Oxford). 43(4):514-7, 2004. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ rheumatology/keh081
20. McDowell, I: Measuring Health: A guide to rating scales and questionaires. Edited, Oxford, Oxford Univerity Press, 2006.
21. Naal, FD; Impellizzeri, FM; Rippstein, PF: Which are the most frequently used outcome instruments in studies on total ankle arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 468(3):815-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-1036-y
22. O'Connor, PA; Yeap, S; Noel, J; et al.: Lisfranc injuries: patient- and physician-based functional outcomes. Int Orthop. 27(2):98-102, 2003.
23. SooHoo, NF; Vyas, R; Samimi, D: Responsiveness of the foot function index, AOFAS clinical rating systems, and SF-36 after foot and ankle surgery. Foot Ankle Int. 27(11):930-4, 2006.
24. Ware, J, Jr; Kosinski, M; Keller, SD: A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 34(3):220-33, 1996. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199603000-00003
25. Ware, JE, Jr; John, E; Ware, Jr: on health status and quality of life assessment and the next generation of outcomes measurement. Interview by Marcia Stevic and Katie Berry. J Healthc Qual. 21(5):12-7, 1999. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1111/j.1945-1474.1999.tb00984.x
26. Ware, JE, Jr; Keller, SD; Hatoum, HT; Kong, SX: The SF-36 Arthritis-Specific Health Index (ASHI): I. Development and crossvalidation of scoring algorithms. Med Care. 37(5 Suppl):MS40-50, 1999. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1097/00005650-199905001-00004
27. Ware, JE, Jr; Sherbourne, CD: The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 30(6):473-83, 1992. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199206000-00002
28. Zlowodzki, M; Bhandari, M: Outcome measures and implications for sample-size calculations. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 91 Suppl 3:35-40, 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.01602