Dataset Information

A review of the foot function index and the foot function index - revised.

ABSTRACT: UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND: The Foot Function Index (FFI) is a self-report, foot-specific instrument measuring pain and disability and has been widely used to measure foot health for over twenty years. A revised FFI (FFI-R) was developed in response to criticism of the FFI. The purpose of this review was to assess the uses of FFI and FFI-R as were reported in medical and surgical literature and address the suggestions found in the literature to improve the metrics of FFI-R. METHODS: A systematic literature search of PubMed/Medline and Embase databases from October 1991 through December 2010 comprised the main sources of literature. To enrich the bibliography, the search was extended to BioMedLib and Scopus search engines and manual search methods. Search terms included FFI, FFI scores, FFI-R. Requirements included abstracts/full length articles, English-language publications, and articles containing the term "foot complaints/problems." Articles selected were scrutinized; EBM abstracted data from literature and collected into tables designed for this review. EBM analyzed tables, KJC, JM, RMS reviewed and confirmed table contents. KJC and JM reanalyzed the original database of FFI-R to improve metrics. RESULTS: Seventy-eight articles qualified for this review, abstracts were compiled into 12 tables. FFI and FFI-R were used in studies of foot and ankle disorders in 4700 people worldwide. FFI Full scale or the Subscales and FFI-R were used as outcome measures in various studies; new instruments were developed based on FFI subscales. FFI Full scale was adapted/translated into other cultures. FFI and FFI-R psychometric properties are reported in this review. Reanalysis of FFI-R subscales' confirmed unidimensionality, and the FFI-R questionnaires' response categories were edited into four responses for ease of use. CONCLUSION: This review was limited to articles published in English in the past twenty years. FFI is used extensively worldwide; this instrument pioneered a quantifiable measure of foot health, and thus has shifted the paradigm of outcome measure to subjective, patient-centered, valid, reliable and responsive hard data endpoints. Edited FFI-R into four response categories will enhance its user friendliness for measuring foot health.

SUBMITTER: Budiman-Mak E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3579714 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A review of the foot function index and the foot function index - revised.

Budiman-Mak Elly E Conrad Kendon J KJ Mazza Jessica J Stuck Rodney M RM

Journal of foot and ankle research 20130201 1

<h4>Unlabelled</h4><h4>Background</h4>The Foot Function Index (FFI) is a self-report, foot-specific instrument measuring pain and disability and has been widely used to measure foot health for over twenty years. A revised FFI (FFI-R) was developed in response to criticism of the FFI. The purpose of this review was to assess the uses of FFI and FFI-R as were reported in medical and surgical literature and address the suggestions found in the literature to improve the metrics of FFI-R.<h4>Methods< ...[more]

PMID: 23369667

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures serve as an invaluable tool in both the clinical and research setting to monitor a patient's condition and efficacy of treatments over time. We aim to validate the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score for disorders of the lower extremity using the revised-Foot Function Index (rFFI) as a reference. The SANE score is a 1-question survey that may improve efficiency of outcome data collection in the clinical setting.MethodsPatient age, sex, visit diagnosis by ICD-10 code, SANE score, and rFFI score were collected retrospectively from 218 initial patient encounters between January 2015 through July 2017. Patients were included if they were 18 years or older and were excluded if they had incomplete SANE or rFFI data. Results of the two scores were compared using the Pearson or Spearman correlation coefficients, with correlation defined as excellent (>0.7), excellent-good (0.61-0.7), good (0.4-0.6), or poor (0.2-0.39). Diagnoses were categorized into 9 subgroups that were analyzed, including forefoot, plantar fasciitis, arthritis, deformity, fracture, tendinitis, osteochondral defect (OCD) of the talus, acute soft tissue trauma, and "other."ResultsThe SANE score had good correlation with the overall rFFI score (r = 0.51, P < .01). When comparing the SANE score to the rFFI subscores, there was good correlation with pain (r = 0.42, P < .01), good correlation with stiffness (r = 0.44, P < .01), poor correlation with activity (r = 0.36, P <.01), good correlation with difficulty (r = 0.52, P < .01), and poor correlation with social issues (r = 0.39, P < .01). Subanalysis showed an excellent-good correlation between SANE and rFFI score for forefoot pathology (r = 0.67, P < .01) and plantar fasciitis (r = 0.63, P < .02), good correlation for arthritis (r = 0.49, P < .04), deformity (r = 0.60, P < .01), fracture (r = 0.50, P < .01), and tendinitis (r = 0.47, P < .02), and no significant correlation for OCD of the talus (r = 0.56, P < .15) and acute soft tissue trauma (r = 0.19, P < .32).ConclusionThe SANE score demonstrates excellent-good correlation with the rFFI for specific pathology including the forefoot and plantar fasciitis and has limited correlation with other pathology.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:After cross-cultural adaption for the German translation of the Ankle-Hindfoot Scale of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS-AHS) and agreement analysis with the Foot Function Index (FFI-D), the following gait analysis study using the Oxford Foot Model (OFM) was carried out to show which of the two scores better correlates with objective gait dysfunction. DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS:Results of the AOFAS-AHS and FFI-D, as well as data from three-dimensional gait analysis were collected from 20 patients with mild to severe ankle and hindfoot pathologies.Kinematic and kinetic gait data were correlated with the results of the total AOFAS scale and FFI-D as well as the results of those items representing hindfoot function in the AOFAS-AHS assessment. With respect to the foot disorders in our patients (osteoarthritis and prearthritic conditions), we correlated the total range of motion (ROM) in the ankle and subtalar joints as identified by the OFM with values identified during clinical examination 'translated' into score values. Furthermore, reduced walking speed, reduced step length and reduced maximum ankle power generation during push-off were taken into account and correlated to gait abnormalities described in the scores. An analysis of correlations with CIs between the FFI-D and the AOFAS-AHS items and the gait parameters was performed by means of the Jonckheere-Terpstra test; furthermore, exploratory factor analysis was applied to identify common information structures and thereby redundancy in the FFI-D and the AOFAS-AHS items. RESULTS:Objective findings for hindfoot disorders, namely a reduced ROM, in the ankle and subtalar joints, respectively, as well as reduced ankle power generation during push-off, showed a better correlation with the AOFAS-AHS total score-as well as AOFAS-AHS items representing ROM in the ankle, subtalar joints and gait function-compared with the FFI-D score.Factor analysis, however, could not identify FFI-D items consistently related to these three indicator parameters (pain, disability and function) found in the AOFAS-AHS. Furthermore, factor analysis did not support stratification of the FFI-D into two subscales. CONCLUSIONS:The AOFAS-AHS showed a good agreement with objective gait parameters and is therefore better suited to evaluate disability and functional limitations of patients suffering from foot and ankle pathologies compared with the FFI-D.

Project description:BackgroundFoot Function Index (FFI) is a valid and reliable outcome measure, which is widely used to measure the foot and ankle functional level and disorders. Until now, no validated Arabic version of the FFI is available. This study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The purpose of this project was to translate and adapt the FFI into Arabic and to evaluate its psychometric properties of validity and reliability.MethodsThe study consisted of two phases. The first phase was the translation and cultural adaptation of the FFI to Arabic. The next phase involved, testing the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the FFI on a sample of 50 consecutive participants which included internal consistency, test-retest reliability, floor and ceiling effects and construct validity.ResultsThe mean age of the study participants was 38 ± 12.94 years. Both the genders were evenly enrolled with 50% of the participants as male and 50% as female. Majority of them complained of plantar fasciopathy (32%) followed by pes planus (22%) and ankle sprain (18%). The scores of FFI-Ar were normally distributed, confirmed by a significant Shapiro-Wilk test. The mean value of FFI-Ar total score was 47.73 ± 19.85. There were no floor or ceiling effects seen in any of the subscales and total score. The internal consistency was good with the Cronbach's alpha value of 0.882, 0.936 and 0.850 for the pain, disability and activity limitation subscales, respectively. The reproducibility of the FFI-Ar was analysed by intra-class correlation coefficient which revealed good to excellent test-retest reliability. A significant correlation was found between FFI-Ar and SF-36 and numeric rating scale (NRS) confirming its construct validity.ConclusionThe FFI-Arabic version showed good validity and reliability in patients with foot and ankle problems. This tool can be used in usual practice and research for analysing foot and ankle disorders in Arabic-speaking people.

Project description:BackgroundThe China Dietary Guidelines Index (CDGI) is a diet quality evaluation index that can present the overall diet quality and is comparable between individuals. The aim of this study was to revise CDGI for Chinese adults according to the Chinese Dietary Guidelines 2016 (CDG-2016), evaluate adherence to recommended diets between 1991 and 2015, and analyze the trend, variation, and determinants of diet quality.MethodsFood, cooking oil, and condiment intakes were estimated based on twenty-four-hour dietary recalls over three consecutive days and the household weighing method. Based on the food and nutrients recommendations for people with different energy requirements in CDG-2016, CDGI was revised as China Dietary Guidelines Index (2019)-Adults (CDGI(2019)-A) by equal weight continuity scoring. Three-level random intercept-slope growth models were applied to analyze the trend, variation, and determinants at both the community and individual levels.ResultsCDGI(2019)-A, the sum of fourteen component scores with a range of 0-110 points, increased significantly from 38.2 in 1991 to 47.3 in 2015. Components with a score of less than half were milk (91.6%), fruits (72.0%), nuts (82.5%), other cereals and beans (82.6%), and seafood (77.7%). Between-individual accounted for 25.6% of the total score variation, of which 87.4% derived from the community level. CDGI(2019)-A score displayed a positive association with being female, having higher education, having higher income, living in an urban area, and knowing the CDG-2016 recommendations. The impact of income and awareness of CDG-2016 varied significantly across communities.ConclusionsAlthough quality of diet has been improving in China, overall quality remains poor, primarily because of inadequate intake of milk and dairy products, nuts, fruits, other cereals and miscellaneous beans, and seafood. Intervention at the community level may improve diet quality more efficiently than at the individual level, and the most effective intervention should be selected in different communities according to local conditions.

Dataset Information

A review of the foot function index and the foot function index - revised.

Publications

A review of the foot function index and the foot function index - revised.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets