文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

经文化调适的德国版 Mayo 肘关节功能评分(MEPS-G)的信度、效度和评价。

Reliability, validity and critical appraisal of the cross-cultural adapted German version of the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS-G).

机构信息

Faculty of Social Work and Health, University of Applied Science and Art (HAWK), Hildesheim, Germany.

German Association for Manual Therapy (DVMT e.V.), Dresden, Germany.

出版信息

J Orthop Surg Res. 2022 Jun 25;17(1):328. doi: 10.1186/s13018-022-03210-5.


DOI:10.1186/s13018-022-03210-5
PMID:35752835
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9233775/
Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) is a rating system consisting of four dimensions to evaluate elbow performance. It is a common tool for assessment of elbow impairments worldwide. We determined the validity and reliability of its German version (MEPS-G) after cross-cultural adaptation. METHODS: Six investigators examined 57 patients with elbow pathologies. The MEPS-G was compared to validated elbow scores such as the German versions of DASH, the Oxford Elbow Score, pain level and subjective elbow performance on a VAS. Inter-rater reliability (IRR) and validity of the score and its dimensions were also reviewed. Verification was performed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the prevalence and bias with adjusted Kappa (PABAK) and the Spearman correlation. RESULTS: The IRR of the MEPS-G score was moderate (ICC (2.1) = 0.65). The IRR of the four individual dimensions was moderate to high (K = 0.55 -0.81). Validity for the sum score (r = 0.52-0.65) and the dimensions pain (r = 0.53-0.62), range of motion (r = 0.7) and stability (r = - 0.61) was verified. The function subscale reached insufficient validity (r = 0.15-0.39). CONCLUSION: The MEPS-G is not sufficiently valid, which is consistent with its English version. The patient-based dimensions were a weakness, demonstrating high risk of bias. There is no general recommendation for the utilization of the MEPS-G as outcome measurement for patients with elbow pathologies.

摘要

背景: Mayo 肘部功能评分(MEPS)是一个由四个维度组成的评分系统,用于评估肘部功能。它是一种全球通用的评估肘部损伤的工具。我们在经过跨文化调适后,确定了其德文版本(MEPS-G)的有效性和可靠性。

方法:六位研究者检查了 57 例肘部病变患者。MEPS-G 与经过验证的肘部评分(如 DASH 的德国版本、牛津肘部评分、疼痛水平和 VAS 上的主观肘部功能)进行了比较。还评估了该评分及其各维度的组内相关系数(ICC)、信度和效度。

结果:MEPS-G 评分的组内相关系数(ICC(2.1)=0.65)为中度。四个单项维度的组内相关系数为中度至高度(K=0.55-0.81)。总分(r=0.52-0.65)和疼痛(r=0.53-0.62)、活动范围(r=0.7)和稳定性(r=-0.61)维度的效度得到验证。功能子量表的效度不足(r=0.15-0.39)。

结论:MEPS-G 的有效性不足,这与其英文版一致。基于患者的维度存在弱点,存在高度的偏倚风险。因此,不建议将 MEPS-G 作为肘部病变患者的结果测量工具。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/248f/9233775/046517251c95/13018_2022_3210_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/248f/9233775/de268876452c/13018_2022_3210_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/248f/9233775/2b82ed38eda2/13018_2022_3210_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/248f/9233775/94780bb62285/13018_2022_3210_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/248f/9233775/046517251c95/13018_2022_3210_Fig4_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/248f/9233775/de268876452c/13018_2022_3210_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/248f/9233775/2b82ed38eda2/13018_2022_3210_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/248f/9233775/94780bb62285/13018_2022_3210_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/248f/9233775/046517251c95/13018_2022_3210_Fig4_HTML.jpg

相似文献

[1]
Reliability, validity and critical appraisal of the cross-cultural adapted German version of the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS-G).

J Orthop Surg Res. 2022-6-25

[2]
Cross-cultural validation of the Oxford Elbow Score and Mayo Elbow Performance Score in Greek.

Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2022-2

[3]
Translation of the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) into German (MEPS-G).

Z Orthop Unfall. 2020-10

[4]
Psychometric properties of the Mayo Elbow Performance Score.

Rheumatol Int. 2015-6

[5]
The Liverpool Elbow Score, patient-answered section: Cultural adaptation, validity and reliability of Turkish version.

Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2020-12

[6]
Reliability Testing of the Mayo Elbow Performance Score in Post-operative Patients.

J Surg Orthop Adv. 2022

[7]
The Elbow Self-Assessment Score (ESAS): development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measurement tool for elbow disorders.

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017-7

[8]
Cross-cultural adaptation and reliability and validity of the Dutch Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE-D).

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2014-8-11

[9]
Cross-cultural adaptation, validity, and reliability of the Turkish version of the Patient-Rated Elbow Evaluation.

Clin Rheumatol. 2019-7-6

[10]
Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Kerlan-Jobe orthopedic clinic shoulder and elbow score for German-speaking overhead athletes.

Physiother Theory Pract. 2022-8

引用本文的文献

[1]
Effect of ultrasound-guided continuous infraclavicular block on early functional rehabilitation following elbow fractures: A pilot study.

J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2025

[2]
Minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) following surgical knee ligament reconstruction: a systematic review.

Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg. 2025-1-22

本文引用的文献

[1]
Translation of the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) into German (MEPS-G).

Z Orthop Unfall. 2020-10

[2]
Arthroscopic debridement for osteoarthritis of the elbow: Results and analysis of predictive factors.

Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019-9-17

[3]
Encouraging mid-term outcomes for arthroscopic autologous osteochondral transplant (OAT) in capitellum osteochondritis dissecans (OCD).

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019-6-24

[4]
Outcome following olecranon osteotomy versus paratricipital approach for complex intra-articular (AO 13-C) fracture of distal humerus: a prospective comparative study.

J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2019-4

[5]
Modified anteromedial and anterolateral elbow arthroscopy portals show superiority to standard portals in guiding arthroscopic radial head screw fixation.

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2019-3-12

[6]
Functional outcome in patients who underwent distal biceps tendon repair.

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2018-11

[7]
Clinical rating systems in elbow research-a systematic review exploring trends and distributions of use.

J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018-2-12

[8]
Making Patients and Doctors Happier - The Potential of Patient-Reported Outcomes.

N Engl J Med. 2017-10-5

[9]
Nerve injuries do occur in elbow arthroscopy.

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017-9-20

[10]
Physical examination of the elbow, what is the evidence? A systematic literature review.

Br J Sports Med. 2017-3-1

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

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索