Reynaud Vivien, Verdilos Anargyros, Pereira Bruno, Boisgard Stéphane, Costes Frédéric, Coudeyre Emmanuel
Plateforme d'Exploration de la Mobilité, INRAE, UNH, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, Université Clermont Auvergne, F-63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Plateforme d'Exploration de la Mobilité, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, Université Clermont Auvergne, F-63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France.
J Clin Med. 2020 Jul 30;9(8):2439. doi: 10.3390/jcm9082439.
(1) Background: We have updated knowledge of the psychometric qualities of patient-reported outcome measures and, for the first time, systematically reviewed and compared the psychometric qualities of physical tests for patients with knee osteoarthritis who are undergoing total knee arthroplasty. This work was conducted to facilitate the choice of the most appropriate instruments to use in studies and clinical practice. (2) Methods: A search of medical databases up to December 2019 identified the studies and thus the instruments used. The quality of the measurement properties was assessed by the Bot et al. criteria. (3) Results: We identified 20 studies involving 25 instruments. Half of the instruments were questionnaires ( = 13). Among the condition-specific instruments, the Oxford knee score, Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcomes Score, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis index had the highest overall scores. Concerning generic tools, the Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form 36 (SF-36) or SF-12 obtained the highest overall score. For patient-specific tools, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale ranked the highest. Some physical tests seemed robust in psychometric properties: 6-min Walk Test, five times Sit-To-Stand test, Timed Up and Go test strength testing of knee flexor/extensor by isometric or isokinetic dynamometer and Pressure Pain Threshold. (4) Conclusion: To make stronger recommendations, key areas such as reproducibility, responsiveness to clinical change, and minimal important change still need more rigorous evaluations. Some promising physical tests (e.g., actimetry) lack validation and require rigorous studies to be used as a core set of outcomes in future studies.
(1) 背景:我们更新了患者报告结局测量指标的心理测量学特性知识,并首次系统回顾和比较了接受全膝关节置换术的膝骨关节炎患者身体测试的心理测量学特性。开展这项工作是为了便于在研究和临床实践中选择最合适的工具。(2) 方法:检索截至2019年12月的医学数据库以确定相关研究及所使用的工具。测量特性的质量通过博特等人的标准进行评估。(3) 结果:我们确定了20项涉及25种工具的研究。其中一半的工具是问卷(n = 13)。在特定疾病工具中,牛津膝关节评分、膝关节损伤和骨关节炎预后评分以及西安大略和麦克马斯特大学骨关节炎指数的总体得分最高。关于通用工具,医学结局研究简表36(SF - 36)或SF - 12的总体得分最高。对于针对患者的工具,医院焦虑抑郁量表排名最高。一些身体测试在心理测量学特性方面似乎表现良好:6分钟步行试验、五次坐立试验、计时起立行走试验、通过等长或等速测力计对膝关节屈伸肌进行的力量测试以及压力疼痛阈值。(4) 结论:为了提出更有力的建议,诸如可重复性、对临床变化的反应性和最小重要变化等关键领域仍需要更严格的评估。一些有前景的身体测试(如活动计步)缺乏验证,需要进行严格研究才能在未来研究中用作核心结局指标。