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。
