Comparison of Generic, Musculoskeletal-Specific, and Foot and Ankle-Specific Outcome Measures Over Time in Tibial Plafond Fractures.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
This study performed a psychometric analysis assessing and comparing the responsiveness of the relevant components of a generic (Short Form-36 [SF36]), a musculoskeletal-specific (Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment [SMFA]), and a foot and ankle-specific (Foot and Ankle Outcome Score [FAOS]) outcome score when evaluating surgically treated tibial plafond fractures over time.Methods
Fifty-one patients were followed for 12 months after their tibial plafond fracture. Responsiveness, or the ability to detect clinical change in a disease, was evaluated through the standardized response mean (SRM), the proportion meeting a minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and floor and ceiling effects.Results
The SRM of the SF36-Physical Component Summary (PCS) was significantly greater than the SMFA-dysfunction index (DI) (P < .01) and FAOS-Activities of Daily Living (ADL) (P = .01) between baseline and 6 months, whereas the SRMs of only SF36-PCS and FAOS-ADL differed (P = .01) between 6 and 12 months. The proportion of patients achieving an MCID for SF36-PCS was higher than FAOS-ADL (P = .03) between baseline and 6 months and higher than SMFA-DI (P = .04) between 6 and 12 months. The FAOS-ADL showed substantial ceiling effects at baseline (88.2%) but much less at 6 months (5.9%) and 12 months (9.8%). Smaller ceiling effects were observed for the SMFA-DI (11.8%) at baseline, whereas none were observed for the SF36-PCS.Conclusions
This study found that the SF36-PCS had greater responsiveness in assessing tibial plafond fractures compared to the SMFA-DI and FAOS-ADL, particularly in the first 6 months after surgery. In addition, limitations were revealed in the SMFA-DI and FAOS-ADL. This study illustrates the necessary diligence required for selection of outcome measures, as musculoskeletal and anatomy specific scores are not necessarily superior.Level of evidence
Level II, prospective cohort study.
SUBMITTER: Sepehri A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8697142 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundAnkle fractures cause considerable pain, loss of function and healthcare resource use. High quality randomised controlled trials are required to evaluate the optimal management protocols for ankle fracture. However, there is debate regarding the most appropriate outcome measure to use when assessing patients with ankle fractures. The aim of this systematic review is to identify and summarise primary outcome measure use in clinical trials of non-pharmacological interventions for adults with an ankle fracture.MethodsWe performed comprehensive searches of the Medline, Embase, CINAHL, AMED and Cochrane CENTRAL databases, as well as ISRCTN and ClinicalTrials.gov online clinical trial registries on 19/06/2019 with no date limits applied. The titles and abstracts were initially screened to identify randomised or quasi-randomised clinical trials of non-pharmacological interventions for ankle fracture in adults. Two authors independently screened the full text of any articles which could potentially be eligible. Descriptive statistics we used to summarise the outcome measures collected in these articles including an assessment of trends over time. Secondary analysis included a descriptive summary of the multi-item patient reported outcome measures used in this study type.ResultsThe searches returned a total of 3380 records. Following application of the eligibility criteria, 121 records were eligible for inclusion in this review. The most frequently collected primary outcome measures in this type of publication was the Olerud Molander Ankle Score, followed by radiographic and range of movement assessments. There was a total of 28 different outcome measures collected and five different multi-item, patient reported outcome measures collected as the primary outcome measure. There was a sequential increase in the number of this type of study published per decade since the 1980's.ConclusionThis review demonstrates the wide range of measurement methods used to assess outcome in adults with an ankle fracture. Future research should focus on establishing the validity and reliability of the outcome measures used in this patient population. Formulation of a consensus based core outcome set for adults with an ankle fracture would be advantageous for ensuring homogeneity across studies in order to meta-analyse trial results.
| S-EPMC6712770 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To summarise the evidence on accuracy of the Ottawa ankle rules, a decision aid for excluding fractures of the ankle and mid-foot. DESIGN:Systematic review. DATA SOURCES:Electronic databases, reference lists of included studies, and experts. REVIEW METHODS:Data were extracted on the study population, the type of Ottawa ankle rules used, and methods. Sensitivities, but not specificities, were pooled using the bootstrap after inspection of the receiver operating characteristics plot. Negative likelihood ratios were pooled for several subgroups, correcting for four main methodological threats to validity. RESULTS:32 studies met the inclusion criteria and 27 studies reporting on 15 581 patients were used for meta-analysis. The pooled negative likelihood ratios for the ankle and mid-foot were 0.08 (95% confidence interval 0.03 to 0.18) and 0.08 (0.03 to 0.20), respectively. The pooled negative likelihood ratio for both regions in children was 0.07 (0.03 to 0.18). Applying these ratios to a 15% prevalence of fracture gave a less than 1.4% probability of actual fracture in these subgroups. CONCLUSIONS:Evidence supports the Ottawa ankle rules as an accurate instrument for excluding fractures of the ankle and mid-foot. The instrument has a sensitivity of almost 100% and a modest specificity, and its use should reduce the number of unnecessary radiographs by 30-40%.
| S-EPMC149439 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic and complex disease, which is a major cause of morbidity and mortality and affects all age groups. It commonly produces secondary effects on the foot, often making daily activities impossible. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide a standardised method of obtaining patients' outlooks on their functional status and wellbeing. Although many instruments have been proposed for obtaining data on persons with DM whose feet are affected by the disease, in many cases the psychometric properties of the instrument have yet to be established. The principal objective of our review was to identify PROMs specific for patients with DM affecting the foot and ankle and to evaluate the psychometric properties and methodological quality of these instruments. In this systematic review, we investigate studies (published in English or Spanish) based on the use of one or more PROMs specific to foot and ankle pathologies for patients with DM (type I or II). To do so, the databases PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, PEDro and Google Scholar were searched for studies that analysed psychometric or clinimetric properties in this respect. These were assessed according to Terwee or COSMIN criteria. Of the 1016 studies identified in the initial search, only 11 were finally included in the qualitative review. Analysis according to Terwee and COSMIN criteria showed that the Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ) presented the greatest number of positive values. The FHSQ is the highest-quality PROM currently available for the foot and ankle, for patients with DM.
| S-EPMC6407033 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatients undergoing fixation for foot and ankle fractures may experience poor outcomes despite achieving apparent anatomic reduction. Adjunct arthroscopy to identify missed concomitant injuries and subtle displacements has been proposed as a vehicle to enhance functional results for these patients. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the literature regarding arthroscopically assisted open reduction and internal fixation (AAORIF) methods for commonly encountered foot and ankle injuries including pilon, ankle, and calcaneus fractures published to date.MethodsA systematic review of the literature was performed using the PubMed database to access all studies reporting on arthroscopically assisted internal fixation methods for pilon, ankle, and calcaneus fractures. Relevant publications were analyzed for details on their respective study designs, the operative technique used, clinical outcomes, outcome instruments used, and reported complications.ResultsA total of 32 studies were included in this review. Two studies on pilon fractures, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and case series with a total of 243 patients, met inclusion criteria. Postoperative articular reductions, bone union, and Mazur scores were found to be significantly better for those using adjunct arthroscopy when compared to those with no arthroscopy use. Patient-reported outcomes were overall reported as excellent for most patients, with no difference in patient-reported outcomes reported in the RCT. For ankle fractures, a total of 17 studies comprising of 2 systematic reviews, 1 meta-analysis, 2 RCTs, 5 retrospective comparative studies, 6 case series, and 1 case-control study met inclusion criteria for this review. Results were mixed, though the overall consensus was that arthroscopy use may help to better visualize concomitant intra-articular injuries and is generally considered safe with at least comparable outcomes to conventional methods. For the calcaneus, 13 studies met the criteria. Two studies were review papers, 8 were case series, and 3 were retrospective comparative studies. A total of 308 patients with 316 fractures formed the basis of analysis. In general, the studies found comparable functional outcomes between with or without arthroscopy use, but found that anatomical reductions were significantly improved with the use of arthroscopy.ConclusionsArthroscopy shows promise as a valuable adjunct tool for internal fixation of foot and ankle fractures, though definitive conclusions as to its clinical significance have yet to be drawn because of limited evidence. Potential advantages related to the direct visualization of the fracture site and minimally invasive nature of arthroscopy were suggested throughout studies examined in this review. The presence of intra-articular pathology may lead to unexpectedly poor outcomes seen in some patients who undergo surgical fixation of ankle fractures with an otherwise anatomic reduction on postoperative radiographs; the ability to diagnose and address these lesions with arthroscopy, therefore, has the potential to improve patient outcomes. To date, however, available literature has not shown that significant improvements in anatomical reductions and treatment of these intra-articular injuries provide any improvement in outcomes over standard fixation methods. Few prospective randomized controlled studies have been performed comparing these 2 operative techniques, rendering any suggestion that AAORIF improves clinical outcomes over traditional open fixation difficult to justify. Further research is indicated for what may be a potentially promising surgical adjunct prior to advocating for its routine use in patients.
| S-EPMC8727837 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale is among the most commonly used instruments for measuring outcome of treatment in patients who sustained a complex ankle or hindfoot injury. It consists of a patient-reported and a physician-reported part. A validated, Dutch version of this instrument is currently not available. The aim of this study was to translate the instrument into Dutch and to determine the measurement properties of the AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale Dutch language version (DLV) in patients with a unilateral ankle fracture.SettingMulticentre (two Dutch hospitals), prospective observational study.ParticipantsIn total, 142 patients with a unilateral ankle fracture were included. Ten patients were lost to follow-up.Primary and secondary outcome measuresPatients completed the subjective (patient-reported) part of the AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale-DLV. A physician or trained physician-assistant completed the physician-reported part. For comparison and evaluation of the measuring characteristics, the Foot Function Index and the Short Form-36 were completed by the patient. Descriptive statistics (including floor and ceiling effects), reliability (ie, internal consistency), construct validity, reproducibility (ie, test-retest reliability, agreement and smallest detectable change) and responsiveness were determined.ResultsThe AOFAS-DLV and its subscales showed good internal consistency (Cronbach's α >0.90). Construct validity and longitudinal validity were proven to be adequate (76.5% of predefined hypotheses were confirmed). Floor effects were not present. Ceiling effects were present from 6 months onwards, as expected. Responsiveness was adequate, with a smallest detectable change of 12.0 points.ConclusionsThe AOFAS-DLV is a reliable, valid and responsive measurement instrument for evaluating functional outcome in patients with a unilateral ankle fracture. This implies that the questionnaire is suitable to compare different treatment modalities within this population or to compare outcome across hospitals.Trial registrationThe Netherlands Trial Register (NTR5613; 05-jan-2016).
| S-EPMC5588950 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires that collect health outcomes directly from the people who experience them. This review critically synthesizes information on generic and selected condition-specific PROMs to describe trends and contemporary issues regarding their development, validation and application.MethodsWe reviewed academic and grey literature on validated PROMs by searching databases, prominent websites, Google Scholar and Google Search. The identification of condition-specific PROMs was limited to common conditions and those with a high burden of disease (eg cancers, cardiovascular disorders). Trends and contemporary issues in the development, validation and application of PROMs were critically evaluated.ResultsThe search yielded 315 generic and condition-specific PROMs. The largest numbers of measures were identified for generic PROMs, musculoskeletal conditions and cancers. The earliest published PROMs were in mental health-related conditions. The number of PROMs grew substantially between 1980s and 2000s but slowed more recently. The number of publications discussing PROMs continues to increase. Issues identified include the use of computer-adaptive testing and increasing concerns about the appropriateness of using PROMs developed and validated for specific purposes (eg research) for other reasons (eg clinical decision making).ConclusionsThe term PROM is a relatively new designation for a range of measures that have existed since at least the 1960s. Although literature on PROMs continues to expand, challenges remain in selecting reliable and valid tools that are fit-for-purpose from the many existing instruments.Patient or public contributionConsumers were not directly involved in this review; however, its outcome will be used in programmes that engage and partner with consumers.
| S-EPMC8369118 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In many patients who undergo open reduction-internal fixation of ankle fractures, there is a failure to achieve good clinical outcomes despite radiographic evidence of anatomic reduction. One possible reason for this is the high incidence of concomitant intra-articular pathology associated with ankle fractures that may go unrecognized using traditional open approaches. Arthroscopy in the setting of acute operative management of ankle fractures provides a means to completely assess intra-articular pathology, as well as provide direct therapeutic intervention in many instances. Arthroscopic management techniques include debridement of loose intra-articular fragments, assisted fracture reduction, microfracture of chondral injuries, and assessment of syndesmotic stability. The indications for arthroscopy in the setting of ankle fractures have not been fully defined; however, it is our practice to perform an arthroscopic assessment of all ankle fractures requiring surgical intervention. We present a sample of our experience using this technique that shows the severity of intra-articular pathology that is often found and occurs even in association with fracture patterns with seemingly innocuous radiographic appearances.
| S-EPMC4427646 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveFoot and ankle problems are highly prevalent in the general population; however, little is known about the characteristics of those seeking medical assessment for these problems. The objective of this study was to explore the extent and types of musculoskeletal foot and ankle problems in primary care.MethodsConsultation data related to musculoskeletal foot and ankle problems in 2006 were extracted from the Consultations in Primary Care Archive (CiPCA), which covers consultations in 12 general practices in North Staffordshire. Data were cross-tabulated by age and gender, and annual consultation prevalence per 10,000 registered persons was calculated.ResultsOf the 55,033 musculoskeletal consultations documented in CiPCA in 2006, 4500 (8%) related to foot and ankle problems. The most commonly documented Read term was 'foot pain' (1281 consultations; 28%), followed by 'ankle pain' [451 (10%)]. Most consultations [3538 (79%)] involved non-traumatic conditions. Females accounted for slightly more consultations than males (55 vs 45%), and the highest proportion of consultations involved people aged 45-64 years (36%). The number of consultations per patient ranged from 1 to 11. Annual consultation prevalence was 290 per 10,000 registered persons and increased with age, reaching a peak in the 65- to 74-year age group (411 per 10,000 registered persons).ConclusionFoot and ankle problems account for a substantial number of consultations in primary care, and most frequently involve non-traumatic conditions. Further research is required to evaluate the factors that influence consultation for foot problems and strategies that general practitioners use to manage these conditions.
| S-EPMC2886311 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is a clear call for improved patient-centered outcomes. The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) is a region-specific patient-reported measure that has been validated for a number of foot and ankle diagnoses, but not hallux rigidus.Questions/purposesThe aim of this study was to validate the FAOS in patients with hallux rigidus.MethodsFrom 2007 to 2013, 211 patients with hallux rigidus (HR) were included in the study. For the construct validity portion of the study, 125 patients completed a Short-Form 12 (SF-12) and FAOS survey. Forty additional HR patients were prospectively given questionnaires to assess the relevance of each FAOS question as it pertained to their HR. Reliability was assessed in 36 HR patients via administration of a second FAOS an average 1 month following the first. In 55 patients, preoperative and postoperative FAOS scores were compared to determine responsiveness.ResultsAll FAOS subscales demonstrated moderate correlation coefficients with the physical functioning, role physical, bodily pain, and physical health component scores of the SF-12, with all subscales demonstrating poor correlation with the SF-12 mental health-related domains. Content validity was high for all FAOS scores, with the exception of the daily activities subscale. All subscales achieved acceptable test-retest reliability with correlation coefficients of ?0.72. Furthermore, all subscales were rated as responsive to change in postoperative patients (p?<?0.001).ConclusionThis study demonstrates the acceptable construct and content validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the FAOS for hallux rigidus. Due to its broad applicability and proven validation across multiple foot and ankle pathologies, the FAOS represents a patient-centered outcome measure that can be reliably used for the assessment of patients with hallux rigidus.
| S-EPMC4733695 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:The American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle-Hindfoot Scale is among the most used questionnaires for measuring functional recovery after a hindfoot injury. Recently, this instrument was translated and culturally adapted into a Dutch version. In this study, the measurement properties of the Dutch language version (DLV) were investigated in patients with a unilateral hindfoot fracture. DESIGN:Multicentre, prospective observational study. SETTING:This multicentre study was conducted in three Dutch hospitals. PARTICIPANTS:In total, 118 patients with a unilateral hindfoot fracture were included. Three patients were lost to follow-up. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES:Patients were asked to complete the AOFAS-DLV, the Foot Function Index and the Short Form-36 on three occasions. Descriptive statistics (including floor and ceiling effects), reliability (ie, internal consistency), construct validity, reproducibility (ie, test-retest reliability, agreement and smallest detectable change (SDC)) and responsiveness were determined. RESULTS:Internal consistency was inadequate for the AOFAS-DLV total scale (?=0.585), but adequate for the function subscale (?=0.863). The questionnaire had adequate construct validity (82.4% of predefined hypotheses were confirmed), but inadequate longitudinal validity (70.6%). No floor effects were found, but ceiling effects were present in all AOFAS-DLV (sub)scales, most pronounced from 6 to 24 months after trauma onwards. Responsiveness was only adequate for the pain and alignment subscales, with a SDC of 1.7 points. CONCLUSIONS:The AOFAS Ankle-Hindfoot Scale DLV has adequate construct validity and is reliable, making it a suitable instrument for cross-sectional studies investigating functional outcome in patients with a hindfoot fracture. The inadequate longitudinal validity and responsiveness, however, hamper the use of the questionnaire in longitudinal studies and for assessing long-term functional outcome. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NTR5613; Post-results.
| S-EPMC5695419 | biostudies-literature