Green Andrew, Liles Clive, Rushton Alison, Kyte Derek G
The Dudley Group NHS Foundation Trust, Russells Hall Hospital, Dudley, West Midlands DY1 2HQ, UK.
School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
Man Ther. 2014 Dec;19(6):517-26. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2014.05.013. Epub 2014 Jun 14.
This systematic review investigated the measurement properties of disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures used in Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome. Two independent reviewers conducted a systematic search of key databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINHAL+ and the Cochrane Library from inception to August 2013) to identify relevant studies. A third reviewer mediated in the event of disagreement. Methodological quality was evaluated using the validated COSMIN (Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments) tool. Data synthesis across studies determined the level of evidence for each patient-reported outcome measure. The search strategy returned 2177 citations. Following the eligibility review phase, seven studies, evaluating twelve different patient-reported outcome measures, met inclusion criteria. A 'moderate' level of evidence supported the structural validity of several measures: the Flandry Questionnaire, Anterior Knee Pain Scale, Functional Index Questionnaire, Eng and Pierrynowski Questionnaire and Visual Analogue Scales for 'usual' and 'worst' pain. In addition, there was a 'Limited' level of evidence supporting the test-retest reliability and validity (cross-cultural, hypothesis testing) of the Persian version of the Anterior Knee Pain Scale. Other measurement properties were evaluated with poor methodological quality, and many properties were not evaluated in any of the included papers. Current disease-specific outcome measures for Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome require further investigation. Future studies should evaluate all important measurement properties, utilising an appropriate framework such as COSMIN to guide study design, to facilitate optimal methodological quality.
本系统评价研究了用于髌股疼痛综合征的疾病特异性患者报告结局测量指标的测量特性。两名独立评审员对关键数据库(从创刊至2013年8月的MEDLINE、EMBASE、AMED、CINHAL+和Cochrane图书馆)进行了系统检索,以识别相关研究。如有分歧,由第三名评审员进行协调。使用经过验证的COSMIN(基于共识的健康测量工具选择标准)工具评估方法学质量。对各项研究的数据综合分析确定了每个患者报告结局测量指标的证据水平。检索策略共返回2177条引文。在资格审查阶段之后,七项评估十二种不同患者报告结局测量指标的研究符合纳入标准。“中等”水平的证据支持了几种测量指标的结构效度:Flandry问卷、前膝疼痛量表、功能指数问卷、Eng和Pierrynowski问卷以及“平常”和“最严重”疼痛的视觉模拟量表。此外,有“有限”水平的证据支持前膝疼痛量表波斯语版本的重测信度和效度(跨文化、假设检验)。其他测量特性的评估方法学质量较差,许多特性在任何纳入论文中均未得到评估。目前用于髌股疼痛综合征的疾病特异性结局测量指标需要进一步研究。未来的研究应利用COSMIN等适当框架评估所有重要的测量特性,以指导研究设计,促进达到最佳方法学质量。