Reporting and interpretation of the functional outcomes after the surgical treatment of disruptions of the pelvic ring A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

We performed a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the use and interpretation of generic and disease-specific functional outcome instruments in the reporting of outcome after the surgical treatment of disruptions of the pelvic ring. A total of 28 papers met our inclusion criteria, with eight reporting only generic outcome instruments, 13 reporting only pelvis-specific outcome instruments, and six reporting both. The Short-Form 36 (SF-36) was by far the most commonly used generic outcome instrument, used in 12 papers, with widely variable reporting of scores. The pelvis-specific outcome instruments were used in 19 studies; the Majeed score in ten, Iowa pelvic score in six, Hannover pelvic score in two and the Orlando pelvic score in one. Four sets of authors, all testing construct validity based on correlation with the SF-36, performed psychometric testing of three pelvis-specific instruments (Majeed, IPS and Orlando scores). No testing of responsiveness, content validity, criterion validity, internal consistency or reproducibility was performed. The existing literature in this area is inadequate to inform surgeons or patients in a meaningful way about the functional outcomes of these fractures after fixation.