• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

自我报告的足部和踝关节评分(SEFAS)的有效性、可靠性和反应性。

Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of a self-reported foot and ankle score (SEFAS).

机构信息

Department of Orthopedics, Kalmar Hospital, Sweden.

出版信息

Acta Orthop. 2012 Apr;83(2):197-203. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2012.657579. Epub 2012 Feb 8.

DOI:10.3109/17453674.2012.657579
PMID:22313352
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3339537/
Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

A questionnaire was introduced by the New Zealand Arthroplasty Registry for use when evaluating the outcome of total ankle replacement surgery. We evaluated the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the modified Swedish version of the questionnaire (SEFAS) in patients with osteoarthritis or inflammatory arthritis before and/or after their ankle was replaced or fused.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The questionnaire was translated into Swedish and cross-culturally adapted according to a standardized procedure. It was sent to 135 patients with ankle arthritis who were scheduled for or had undergone surgery, together with the foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS), the short form 36 (SF-36) score, and the EuroQol (EQ-5D) score. Construct validity was evaluated with Spearman's correlation coefficient when comparing SEFAS with FAOS, SF-36, and EQ-5D, content validity by calculating floor and ceiling effects, test-retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha (n = 62), agreement by Bland-Altman plot, and responsiveness by effect size and standardized response mean (n = 37).

RESULTS

For construct validity, we correlated SEFAS with the other scores and 70% or more of our predefined hypotheses concerning correlations could be confirmed. There were no floor or ceiling effects. ICC was 0.92 (CI 95%: 0.88-0.95), Cronbach's alpha 0.96, effect size was 1.44, and the standardized response mean was 1.00.

INTERPRETATION

SEFAS is a self-reported foot and ankle score with good validity, reliability and responsiveness, indicating that the score can be used to evaluate patients with osteoarthritis or inflammatory arthritis of the ankle and outcome of surgery.

摘要

背景与目的

新西兰关节置换登记处引入了一份问卷,用于评估全踝关节置换手术后的结果。我们评估了改良的瑞典版问卷(SEFAS)在踝关节置换或融合前后患有骨关节炎或炎症性关节炎的患者中的可靠性、有效性和反应性。

患者与方法

该问卷被翻译成瑞典语,并按照标准化程序进行跨文化适应性调整。它被发送给 135 名计划接受或已经接受踝关节手术的关节炎患者,同时还发送了足踝结局评分(FAOS)、简明 36 项健康调查(SF-36)评分和欧洲五维健康量表(EQ-5D)评分。通过 Spearman 相关系数评估结构效度,当 SEFAS 与 FAOS、SF-36 和 EQ-5D 进行比较时;内容效度通过计算地板和天花板效应来评估;通过组内相关系数(ICC)评估测试-重测可靠性(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估内部一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62);通过 Bland-Altman 图评估一致性和 Cronbach's alpha(n = 62)。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9b7b/3339537/119394b5360b/ORT-1745-3674-083-197_g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9b7b/3339537/119394b5360b/ORT-1745-3674-083-197_g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/9b7b/3339537/119394b5360b/ORT-1745-3674-083-197_g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of a self-reported foot and ankle score (SEFAS).自我报告的足部和踝关节评分(SEFAS)的有效性、可靠性和反应性。
Acta Orthop. 2012 Apr;83(2):197-203. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2012.657579. Epub 2012 Feb 8.
2
Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the German self-reported foot and ankle score (SEFAS) in patients with foot or ankle surgery.德国自我报告的足踝评分(SEFAS)在足踝手术患者中的信度、效度及反应度
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Oct 10;18(1):409. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1772-1.
3
Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) in forefoot, hindfoot, and ankle disorders.自报告足部和踝关节评分(SEFAS)在前足、后足和踝关节疾病中的有效性、可靠性和反应性。
Acta Orthop. 2014 Apr;85(2):187-94. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2014.889979. Epub 2014 Feb 25.
4
Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of a self-reported foot and ankle score (SEFAS).自我报告的足踝评分(SEFAS)的效度、信度和反应度。
Acta Orthop. 2012 Dec;83(6):674; author reply; 674-5. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2012.747927. Epub 2012 Nov 11.
5
Validity and reliability of Thai version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score in patients with arthritis of the foot and ankle.泰语版足踝结局评分在足踝关节炎患者中的效度和信度
Foot Ankle Surg. 2016 Dec;22(4):224-228. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2015.09.006. Epub 2015 Oct 13.
6
Comparison of the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) and the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (SEFAS) in patients with foot or ankle surgery.足踝手术患者中曼彻斯特-牛津足部问卷(MOXFQ)与自我报告的足踝结局评分(SEFAS)的比较。
Foot Ankle Surg. 2019 Jun;25(3):361-365. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2018.01.003. Epub 2018 Feb 9.
7
Comparison of the Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) and the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society Score (AOFAS).自我报告的足踝评分(SEFAS)与美国矫形足踝协会评分(AOFAS)的比较。
Foot Ankle Int. 2014 Oct;35(10):1031-6. doi: 10.1177/1071100714543647. Epub 2014 Jul 11.
8
Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score in patients with foot or ankle pain.土耳其版足部和踝关节自我报告评分在足部或踝关节疼痛患者中的有效性和可靠性。
Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2020 Jul;54(4):408-413. doi: 10.5152/j.aott.2020.19185.
9
Danish translation and validation of the Self-reported foot and ankle score (SEFAS) in patients with ankle related fractures.丹麦文翻译和验证自报足部和踝关节评分(SEFAS)在踝关节相关骨折患者中的应用。
Foot Ankle Surg. 2021 Jul;27(5):521-527. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2020.06.014. Epub 2020 Sep 23.
10
[Patient-reported SEFAS: Questionnaire good evaluation method in foot and ankle disorders].[患者报告的足踝疾病特异性功能和外观量表:足部和踝关节疾病的良好问卷评估方法]
Lakartidningen. 2015 Feb 10;112:C9LS.

引用本文的文献

1
Patient-Reported Outcomes Before and After Hallux Valgus Surgery: 2-Year Results From a National Registry Study.拇外翻手术前后患者报告的结局:一项国家登记研究的2年结果
Foot Ankle Orthop. 2025 Jul 24;10(3):24730114251351634. doi: 10.1177/24730114251351634. eCollection 2025 Jul.
2
Comparison of the European Foot and Ankle Score (EFAS) and the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) in patients with foot and ankle surgery.比较足部和踝关节手术患者的欧洲足部和踝关节评分(EFAS)和自我报告的足部和踝关节评分(SEFAS)。
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Nov;144(11):4929-4935. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05585-y. Epub 2024 Sep 28.
3

本文引用的文献

1
The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?哈里斯髋关节评分:天花板效应是否限制了其在骨科中的应用?
Acta Orthop. 2010 Dec;81(6):703-7. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2010.537808.
2
Evaluation of two self-referent foot health instruments.两种自我参照足部健康工具的评估
Foot (Edinb). 2010 Dec;20(4):101-8. doi: 10.1016/j.foot.2010.07.001. Epub 2010 Sep 25.
3
Which are the most frequently used outcome instruments in studies on total ankle arthroplasty?在全踝关节置换术研究中,最常使用的结果评估工具是什么?
Cross-Culturally Adapted Versions of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for the Lower Extremity.
下肢患者报告结局量表的跨文化适应版本
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2023 Jun 1;V18(3):653-686. doi: 10.26603/001c.74528. eCollection 2023.
4
Outcomes of trabecular metal total ankle replacement: a longitudinal observational cohort study of 239 consecutive cases from the Swedish Ankle Registry.经皮肾镜碎石取石术后迟发性出血的危险因素分析:一项单中心回顾性队列研究
Acta Orthop. 2022 Jul 27;93:689-695. doi: 10.2340/17453674.2022.4387.
5
Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Clinimetric Testing of Functional Rating Index (FRI) Outcome Measure into the Arabic Language.功能评定指数(FRI)结果测量指标的跨文化适应及阿拉伯语临床测量学测试
Rehabil Res Pract. 2022 Jun 23;2022:6229847. doi: 10.1155/2022/6229847. eCollection 2022.
6
Association of Delayed Surgery for Ankle Fractures and Patient-Reported Outcomes.踝关节骨折延迟手术与患者报告结局的相关性。
Foot Ankle Int. 2022 Jun;43(6):762-771. doi: 10.1177/10711007211070540. Epub 2022 Feb 20.
7
International Foot and Ankle Osteoarthritis Consortium review and research agenda for diagnosis, epidemiology, burden, outcome assessment and treatment.国际足部和踝关节骨关节炎联合会的诊断、流行病学、负担、结果评估和治疗的审查和研究议程。
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2022 Jul;30(7):945-955. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2022.02.603. Epub 2022 Feb 15.
8
Antiresorptive treatment and talar collapse after displaced fractures of the talar neck: a long-term follow-up of 19 patients.抗吸收治疗与距骨颈移位骨折后距骨塌陷:19 例患者的长期随访。
Acta Orthop. 2021 Aug;92(4):455-460. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2021.1915017. Epub 2021 Apr 18.
9
Traditional Approach vs Posterior Approach for Ankle Fractures Involving the Posterior Malleolus.传统入路与后入路治疗涉及后踝的踝关节骨折。
Foot Ankle Int. 2021 Apr;42(4):389-399. doi: 10.1177/1071100720969431. Epub 2020 Nov 17.
10
The quality of life in epidermolysis bullosa (EB-QoL) questionnaire: Translation, cultural adaptation, and validation into the Farsi language.大疱性表皮松解症生活质量(EB-QoL)问卷:翻译成波斯语、文化调适及效度验证
Int J Womens Dermatol. 2020 Jun 3;6(4):301-305. doi: 10.1016/j.ijwd.2020.05.012. eCollection 2020 Sep.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010 Mar;468(3):815-26. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1036-y. Epub 2009 Aug 12.
4
Validation of the Turkish version of the foot and ankle outcome score.土耳其版足踝结局评分的验证。
Rheumatol Int. 2009 Dec;30(2):169-73. doi: 10.1007/s00296-009-0929-0.
5
The Dutch version of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score: a validation study.膝关节损伤与骨关节炎疗效评分的荷兰语版本:一项验证研究。
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008 Feb 26;6:16. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-6-16.
6
A New Zealand national joint registry review of 202 total ankle replacements followed for up to 6 years.新西兰国家联合登记处对202例全踝关节置换术进行了长达6年的随访回顾。
Acta Orthop. 2007 Oct;78(5):584-91. doi: 10.1080/17453670710014266.
7
The 36-item short form.36项简短量表。
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007 Feb;15(2):126-34. doi: 10.5435/00124635-200702000-00007.
8
Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires.针对健康状况调查问卷的测量属性提出了质量标准。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2007 Jan;60(1):34-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012. Epub 2006 Aug 24.
9
Results of an Internet survey determining the most frequently used ankle scores by AOFAS members.一项互联网调查的结果,该调查确定了美国足踝外科协会(AOFAS)成员最常使用的踝关节评分。
Foot Ankle Int. 2005 Jun;26(6):479-82. doi: 10.1177/107110070502600609.
10
Validation of the EuroQol questionnaire in cardiac rehabilitation.欧洲五维度健康量表问卷在心脏康复中的效度验证
Heart. 2006 Jan;92(1):62-7. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2004.052787. Epub 2005 Mar 29.