Suppr超能文献

终末期踝关节关节炎患者 SF-36、踝关节骨关节炎量表、AOFAS 踝关节后足评分和足部功能指数的反应性和有效性。

Responsiveness and validity of the SF-36, Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale, AOFAS Ankle Hindfoot Score, and Foot Function Index in end stage ankle arthritis.

机构信息

Department of Orthopaedics, Glasgow Royal Infirmary., Glasgow, UK.

出版信息

Foot Ankle Int. 2012 Jan;33(1):57-63. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2012.0057.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

We examined four commonly used scores, the SF-36, the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale (AOS), the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Ankle Hindfoot Score, and the Foot Function Index (FFI) to determine their responsiveness and validity.

METHODS

Patients with end stage ankle arthritis were recruited into a prospective multicenter cohort study and baseline and one year outcome scores were compared. The Standardized Response Mean and Effect Size for the AOS, AOFAS, and FFI were calculated and the three region- or disease-specific scores were compared with the SF-36 to determine their criterion validity.

RESULTS

All four scores showed acceptable responsiveness, and when using the validated SF-36 as the standard the three region or disease specific scores all showed similar criterion validity.

CONCLUSION

All four scores are responsive and can be considered for use in this population. The objective component of the AOFAS Ankle Hindfoot Score may make it harder to perform than the other three scores which have subjective components only, and as yet its objective component has not been shown to demonstrate reliability. We recommend use of a purely subjective score such as the Ankle Osteoarthritis Scale or Foot Function Index as the region- or disease-specific score of choice in this population. As the SF-36 shows acceptable responsiveness, using it alone could also be considered.

摘要

背景

我们研究了四个常用的评分量表,即 SF-36、踝关节骨关节炎量表(AOS)、美国矫形足踝协会(AOFAS)踝关节后足评分和足部功能指数(FFI),以确定它们的反应能力和有效性。

方法

将终末期踝关节关节炎患者纳入前瞻性多中心队列研究,并比较基线和一年后的结果评分。计算 AOS、AOFAS 和 FFI 的标准化反应均值和效应量,并将这三个区域或疾病特异性评分与 SF-36 进行比较,以确定其标准效度。

结果

四项评分均表现出良好的反应能力,且当以经过验证的 SF-36 作为标准时,这三个区域或疾病特异性评分均表现出相似的标准效度。

结论

四项评分均具有反应能力,可考虑用于该人群。AOFAS 踝关节后足评分的客观成分可能比其他三个仅具有主观成分的评分更难操作,而其客观成分的可靠性尚未得到证实。我们建议在该人群中使用纯粹的主观评分,如踝关节骨关节炎量表或足部功能指数,作为区域或疾病特异性评分的首选。由于 SF-36 表现出可接受的反应能力,单独使用它也可以考虑。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验