Al-Dadah Oday, Shepstone Lee, Donell Simon T
Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Newcastle-upon-Tyne NE2 4HH, Tyne and Wear, United Kingdom.
Department of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, South Tyneside District Hospital, South Shields NE34 0PL, Tyne and Wear, United Kingdom.
World J Clin Cases. 2022 Oct 26;10(30):10939-10955. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i30.10939.
Numerous anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) clinical outcome measures exist. However, the result of one score does not equate to the findings of another even when evaluating the same patient group.
To investigate if statistically derived formulae can be used to predict the outcome of one knee scoring system when the result of another is known in patients with ACL rupture before and after reconstruction.
Fifty patients with ACL rupture were evaluated using nine clinical outcome measures. These included Tegner Activity Score, Lysholm Knee Score, Cincinnati Knee Score, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Objective Knee Score, Tapper and Hoover Meniscal Grading Score, IKDC Subjective Knee Score, Knee Outcome Survey - Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADLS), Short Form-12 Item Health Survey and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Thirty-four patients underwent an ACL reconstruction and were reassessed post-operatively.
The mean total of each of the nine outcome scores appreciably differed from each other. Significant correlations and regressions were found between most of the outcome scores and were stronger post-operatively. The strongest correlation was found between Cincinnati and KOS-ADLS ( = 0.91, < 0.001). The strongest regression formula was also found between Cincinnati and KOS-ADLS ( = 0.84, < 0.001).
The formulae produced from this study can be used to predict the outcome of one knee score when the results of the other are known. These formulae could facilitate the conduct of systematic reviews and meta-analysis in studies relating to ACL injuries by allowing the pooling of substantially more data.
存在众多前交叉韧带(ACL)临床结局测量方法。然而,即使评估的是同一患者群体,一种评分的结果也并不等同于另一种评分的结果。
探讨在ACL重建前后的患者中,当已知另一种评分结果时,基于统计学推导的公式是否可用于预测一种膝关节评分系统的结局。
使用九种临床结局测量方法对50例ACL断裂患者进行评估。这些方法包括Tegner活动评分、Lysholm膝关节评分、辛辛那提膝关节评分、国际膝关节文献委员会(IKDC)客观膝关节评分、Tapper和胡佛半月板分级评分、IKDC主观膝关节评分、膝关节结局调查 - 日常生活活动量表(KOS-ADLS)、简短健康调查问卷12项版以及膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结局评分。34例患者接受了ACL重建,并在术后进行了重新评估。
九种结局评分中每种评分的总分均值彼此明显不同。大多数结局评分之间发现了显著的相关性和回归关系,且术后更强。辛辛那提评分与KOS-ADLS之间的相关性最强(r = 0.91,P < 0.001)。辛辛那提评分与KOS-ADLS之间也发现了最强的回归公式(R² = 0.84,P < 0.001)。
本研究得出的公式可用于在已知另一种评分结果时预测一种膝关节评分的结局。这些公式通过允许汇集更多数据,有助于在与ACL损伤相关的研究中进行系统评价和荟萃分析。