Hoch Johanna M, Legner Jamie L, Lorete Christina, Hoch Matthew C
1 Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA United States of America.
J Sport Rehabil. 2017 May 1;26(3). doi: 10.1123/jsr.2016-0089. Epub 2016 Sep 16.
Documented barriers to implementation of patient-reported outcome instruments (PROs) in practice include administration and scoring time. The Quick Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (Quick-FAAM) was developed to decrease these barriers; however, the clinometric properties in an acute population are unknown.
To determine the internal consistency, validity, and the floor and ceiling effects of the Quick-FAAM in patients seeking treatment for an acute or subacute ankle or foot health condition.
Cross-Sectional.
Healthcare facilities.
50 patients (20.3 ± 2.2 y, 177.9 ± 10.7 cm, 80 ± 19.4 kg) seeking treatment for an acute or subacute ankle or foot condition.
Each patient completed a demographic and health-history questionnaire followed by 5 PROs: the Quick-FAAM, the FAAM-Activities of Daily Living (ADL), FAAM-Sport, the modified Disablement in the Physically Active Scale (mDPA), the Short-Form 12 (SF-12) and the PROMISv1.2 Physical Function (PROMIS-PF). Cronbach alpha was used to determine internal consistency and Spearman’s rank correlations were performed to examine the relationship between the Quick-FAAM and all other outcomes.
The Quick-FAAM was very strongly correlated with the FAAM-Total (r = .91, r2 = .83, P < .001), FAAM-ADL (r = .83, r2 = .69, P < .001), FAAM-Sport (r = .89, r2 = .79, P < .001), SF12-Physical Component Score (PCS, r = .74, r2 = .55, P < .001), mDPA-PCS (r = -.83, r2 = .69, P < .001) and PROMIS PF (r = .85, r2 = .72, P < .001). There was a weak or no relationship with the SF12-Mental Component Score (MCS, r = .04, r2 = .00, P < .001) and the mDPA-MCS (r = -.35, r2 = .12, P < .001). A total of 8% (n = 4) of the patients scored a 0, and 2% (n = 1) patients scored a 48.
he Quick-FAAM demonstrated good convergent and divergent validity along with good internal consistency. There was no evidence of a floor or ceiling effect. Therefore, the Quick-FAAM should be considered for use in practice when determining treatment effectiveness for patients with acute or subacute ankle or foot health conditions. Future research should determine the test-retest reliability and the minimal detectable change of this instrument.
实践中已记录的患者报告结局工具(PROs)实施障碍包括管理和评分时间。快速足踝能力测量量表(Quick-FAAM)的开发旨在减少这些障碍;然而,其在急性人群中的测量学特性尚不清楚。
确定Quick-FAAM在寻求急性或亚急性踝或足部健康状况治疗的患者中的内部一致性、效度以及地板效应和天花板效应。
横断面研究。
医疗机构。
50例寻求急性或亚急性踝或足部疾病治疗的患者(年龄20.3±2.2岁,身高177.9±10.7厘米,体重80±19.4千克)。
每位患者完成一份人口统计学和健康史问卷,随后完成5项PROs:Quick-FAAM、FAAM日常生活活动量表(ADL)、FAAM运动量表、改良的身体活动障碍量表(mDPA)、简短健康调查问卷12项版(SF-12)和患者报告结果测量信息系统v1.2身体功能量表(PROMIS-PF)。采用Cronbach α系数确定内部一致性,并进行Spearman等级相关分析以检验Quick-FAAM与所有其他结局之间的关系。
Quick-FAAM与FAAM总分(r = 0.91,r² = 0.83,P < 0.001)、FAAM-ADL(r = 0.83,r² = 0.69,P < 0.001)、FAAM-运动量表(r = 0.89,r² = 0.79,P < 0.001)、SF12身体成分得分(PCS,r = 0.74,r² = 0.55,P < 0.001)、mDPA-PCS(r = -0.83,r² = 0.69,P < 0.001)和PROMIS PF(r = 0.85,r² = 0.72,P < 0.001)呈非常强的相关性。与SF12心理成分得分(MCS,r = 0.04,r² = 0.00,P < 0.001)和mDPA-MCS(r = -0.35,r² = 0.12,P < 0.001)的相关性较弱或无相关性。共有8%(n = 4)的患者得分为0,2%(n = 1)的患者得分为48。
Quick-FAAM显示出良好的聚合效度和区分效度以及良好的内部一致性。没有地板效应或天花板效应的证据。因此,在确定急性或亚急性踝或足部健康状况患者的治疗效果时,应考虑在实践中使用Quick-FAAM。未来的研究应确定该工具的重测信度和最小可检测变化。