Patient-reported outcome measures in arthroplasty registries: Report of the Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Working Group of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries: Part I. Overview and rationale for patient-reported outcome measures

Acta Orthopaedica

Volumn 87, Issue , 2016, Pages 3-8

  Rolfson, Ola ^a   Eresian Chenok, Kate ^b   Bohm, Eric ^c   Lübbeke, Anne ^d   Denissen, Geke ^e   Dunn, Jennifer ^f   Lyman, Stephen ^g   Franklin, Patricia ^h   Dunbar, Michael ⁱ   Overgaard, Søren ^j   Garellick, Göran ^a   Dawson, Jill ^k  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GOTHENBURG   (Sweden)

^b California Joint Replacement Registry   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA   (Canada)

^d GENEVA UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS   (Switzerland)

^e Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI)   (Netherlands)

^f UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

^g HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

ⁱ DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^j UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^k UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTHROPLASTY; ARTICLE; ASSESSMENT OF HUMANS; HEALTH PROGRAM; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HIP DISABILITY AND OSTEOARTHRITIS OUTCOME SCORE; HUMAN; KNEE ARTHROPLASTY; KNEE INJURY AND OSTEOARTHRITIS OUTCOME SCORE; OXFORD HIP SCORE; OXFORD KNEE SCORE; PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES; QUALITY OF LIFE; REGISTER; RELIABILITY; SHORT FORM 12; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES ACTIVITY SCORE; VALIDITY; WESTERN ONTARIO AND MCMASTER UNIVERSITIES OSTEOARTHRITIS INDEX; KNEE REPLACEMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOME; QUESTIONNAIRE;

ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; HUMANS; PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOME MEASURES; PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUALITY OF LIFE; REGISTRIES; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84966713050     PISSN: 17453674     EISSN: 17453682     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17453674.2016.1181815     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. N.Bellamy, W.W.Buchanan, C.H.Goldsmith, J.Campbell, L.W.Stitt Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1988; 15(12): 1833–40.
2. Boston University School of Public Health. VR-36, VR-12 and VR-6D. Boston University School of Public Health Web site. http://www.bu.edu/sph/research/research-landing-page/vr-36-vr-12-and-vr-6d/. 2015.
3. E.K.Breivik, G.A.Björnsson, E.Skovlund A comparison of pain rating scales by sampling from clinical trial data. Clin J Pain 2000; 16(1): 22–8.
4. S.J.Coons, C.J.Gwaltney, R.D.Hays, J.J.Lundy, J.A.Sloan, D.A.Revicki, W.R.Lenderking, D.Cella, E.Basch, ISPOR ePRO Task Force. Recommendations on evidence needed to support measurement equivalence between electronic and paper-based patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures: ISPOR ePRO Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health 2009; 12(4): 419–29.
5. J.Dawson, R.Fitzpatrick, A.Carr, D.Murray Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996; 78(2): 185–90.
6. J.Dawson, R.Fitzpatrick, D.Murray, A.Carr Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998; 80(1): 63–9.
7. Department of Health. Guidance on the routine collection of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for the NHS in England 2009/10. UK: Department of Health; 2008.
8. M.J.Dunbar, G.Richardson, O.Robertsson I can’t get no satisfaction after my total knee replacement: rhymes and reasons. Bone Joint J 2013; 95-B(11 suppl A): 148–52.
9. EuroQol Group. EQ-5D. EuroQol Group Web site. http://www.euroqol.org. 2015.
10. EuroQol Group. EuroQol – a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990; 16(3): 199–208.
11. P.D.Franklin, J.J.Allison, D.C.Ayers Beyond joint implant registries: a patient-centered research consortium for comparative effectiveness in total joint replacement. JAMA 2012; 308(12): 1217-8.
12. G.A.Hawker, S.Mian, T.Kendzerska, M.French Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form-36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF-36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011; 63 (suppl 11): S240–S52.
13. M.J.Hjermstad, P.M.Fayers, D.F.Haugen, A.Caraceni, G.W.Hanks, J.H.Loge, R.Fainsinger, N.Aass, S.Kaasa, European Palliative Care Research Collaborative (EPCRC). Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review. J Pain Symptom Manage 2011; 41(6): 1073–93.
14. R.Jaeschke, J.Singer, G.H.Guyatt Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10(4): 407–15.
15. M.Kosinski, S.D.Keller, H.T.Hatoum, S.X.Kong, J.E.WareJr.The SF-36 Health Survey as a generic outcome measure in clinical trials of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: tests of data quality, scaling assumptions and score reliability. Med Care 1999; 37(5 suppl): MS10–22.
16. D.W.Murray, R.Fitzpatrick, K.Rogers, H.Pandit, D.J.Beard, A.J.Carr, J.Dawson The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007; 89(8): 1010–4.
17. A.K.Nilsdotter, L.S.Lohmander, M.Klässbo, E.M.Roos Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS) – validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2003; 4: 10.
18. Optum Inc. SF-36.org: a community for measuring health outcomes using SF tools. Optum Inc. Web site. http://www.sf-36.org. 2015.
19. J.H.Petersen Book review: Quality of Life. Assessment, Analysis and Interpretation. P. M. Fayers and D. Machin, Wiley, Chichester, 2000. No. of pages: xii +404. Price: £60.00. ISBN 0-471-96861-7. Stat Med 2001; 20(14): 2214–6.
20. M.E.Porter What is value in health care? N Engl J Med 2010; 363(26): 2477–81.
21. O.Rolfson, J.Kärrholm, L.E.Dahlberg, G.Garellick Patient-reported outcomes in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register: results of a nationwide prospective observational study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011a; 93(7): 867–75.
22. O.Rolfson, A.Rothwell, A.Sedrakyan, K.E.Chenok, E.Bohm, K.J.Bozic, G.Garellick Use of patient-reported outcomes in the context of different levels of data. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011b; 93 (suppl 3): 66–71.
23. E.M.Roos, H.P.Roos, L.S.Lohmander, C.Ekdahl, B.D.Beynnon Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) – development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1998; 28(2): 88–96.
24. M.Rothman, L.Burke, P.Erickson, N.K.Leidy, D.L.Patrick, C.D.Petrie Use of existing patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments and their modification: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Evaluating and Documenting Content Validity for the Use of Existing Instruments and Their Modification PRO Task Force Report. Value Health 2009; 12(8): 1075–83.
25. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2006; 4: 79.
26. J.E.WareJr, C.D.Sherbourne The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992; 30(6): 473–83.
27. J.WareJr, M.Kosinski, S.D.Keller A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care 1996; 34(3): 220–33.
28. D.Wild, A.Grove, M.Martin, S.Eremenco, S.McElroy, A.Verjee-Lorenz, P.Erikson, ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Principles of Good Practice for the Translation and Cultural Adaptation Process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) Measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. Value Health 2005; 8(2): 94–104.
29. K.W.Wyrwich, W.M.Tierney, F.D.Wolinsky Further evidence supporting an SEM-based criterion for identifying meaningful intra-individual changes in health-related quality of life. J Clin Epidemiol 1999; 52(9): 861–73.
30. C.A.Zahiri, T.P.Schmalzried, E.S.Szuszczewicz, H.C.Amstutz Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13(8): 890–5.