Minimally important change, measurement error, and responsiveness for the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score

被引:24
|
作者
Coster, Maria C. [1 ]
Nilsdotter, Anna [2 ]
Brudin, Lars [3 ,4 ]
Bremander, Ann [5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] SUS Malmo, Dept Orthoped & Clin Sci, Malmo, Sweden
[2] Sahlgrens Univ Hosp, Gothenburg, Sweden
[3] Kalmar Hosp, Dept Clin Physiol, Kalmar, Sweden
[4] Linkoping Univ Hosp, Dept Med & Hlth Sci, Linkoping, Sweden
[5] Lund Univ, Dept Clin Sci, Rheumatol Sect, Lund, Sweden
[6] Halmstad Univ, Sch Business Engn & Sci, Halmstad, Sweden
关键词
CLINICALLY IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE; METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY; COSMIN CHECKLIST; OUTCOME MEASURES; RELIABILITY; HINDFOOT; FOREFOOT; VALIDITY; SOCIETY; SEFAS;
D O I
10.1080/17453674.2017.1293445
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and purpose - Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to evaluate results in orthopedic surgery. To enhance good responsiveness with a PROM, the minimally important change (MIC) should be established. MIC reflects the smallest measured change in score that is perceived as being relevant by the patients. We assessed MIC for the Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) used in Swedish national registries. Patients and methods - Patients with forefoot disorders (n = 83) or hindfoot/ankle disorders (n = 80) completed the SEFAS before surgery and 6 months after surgery. At 6 months also, a patient global assessment (PGA) scaleas external criterionwas completed. Measurement error was expressed as the standard error of a single determination. MIC was calculated by (1) median change scores in improved patients on the PGA scale, and (2) the best cutoff point (BCP) and area under the curve (AUC) using analysis of receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs). Results - The change in mean summary score was the same, 9 (SD 9), in patients with forefoot disorders and in patients with hindfoot/ankle disorders. MIC for SEFAS in the total sample was 5 score points (IQR: 2-8) and the measurement error was 2.4. BCP was 5 and AUC was 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7-0.9). Interpretation - As previously shown, SEFAS has good responsiveness. The score change in SEFAS 6 months after surgery should exceed 5 score points in both forefoot patients and hindfoot/ankle patients to be considered as being clinically relevant.
引用
收藏
页码:300 / 304
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the German self-reported foot and ankle score (SEFAS) in patients with foot or ankle surgery
    Arbab, Dariusch
    Kuhlmann, Katharina
    Schnurr, Christoph
    Bouillon, Bertil
    Luering, Christian
    Konig, Dietmar
    BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2017, 18
  • [2] Comparison of the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) and the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society Score (AOFAS)
    Coster, Maria C.
    Rosengren, Bjorn E.
    Bremander, Ann
    Brudin, Lars
    Karlsson, Magnus K.
    FOOT & ANKLE INTERNATIONAL, 2014, 35 (10) : 1031 - 1036
  • [3] Comparison of the European Foot and Ankle Score (EFAS) and the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) in patients with foot and ankle surgery
    Frank, Victoria Julia
    Lichte, Philip
    Gutteck, Natalia
    Bouillon, Bertil
    Arbab, Dariusch
    ARCHIVES OF ORTHOPAEDIC AND TRAUMA SURGERY, 2024, 144 (11) : 4929 - 4935
  • [4] Evaluation of the Dutch version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS): responsiveness and Minimally Important Change
    Sierevelt, I. N.
    van Eekeren, I. C. M.
    Haverkamp, D.
    Reilingh, M. L.
    Terwee, C. B.
    Kerkhoffs, G. M. M. J.
    KNEE SURGERY SPORTS TRAUMATOLOGY ARTHROSCOPY, 2016, 24 (04) : 1339 - 1347
  • [5] Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the German self-reported foot and ankle score (SEFAS) in patients with foot or ankle surgery
    Dariusch Arbab
    Katharina Kuhlmann
    Christoph Schnurr
    Bertil Bouillon
    Christian Lüring
    Dietmar König
    BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 18
  • [6] Danish translation and validation of the Self-reported foot and ankle score (SEFAS) in patients with ankle related fractures
    Erichsen, J. L.
    Jensen, C.
    Larsen, M. S.
    Damborg, F.
    Viberg, B.
    FOOT AND ANKLE SURGERY, 2021, 27 (05) : 521 - 527
  • [7] Comparison of the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) and the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (SEFAS) in patients with foot or ankle surgery
    Arbab, Dariusch
    Kuhlmann, Katharina
    Schnurr, Christoph
    Luering, Christian
    Koenig, Dietmar
    Bouillon, Bertil
    FOOT AND ANKLE SURGERY, 2019, 25 (03) : 361 - 365
  • [8] Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score: Italian Translation, Validation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation
    Passafiume, Luca
    Curti, Francesca
    Marsocci, Antonio
    Cairoli, Alessio
    Lombardo, Danilo
    Lo Stocco, Andrea
    Pogelli, Pierpaolo
    Magnifica, Fabrizio
    MLTJ-MUSCLES LIGAMENTS AND TENDONS JOURNAL, 2024, 14 (03): : 430 - 437
  • [9] Age- and Gender-Specific Normative Values for the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS)
    Coster, Maria C.
    Rosengren, Bjorn E.
    Karlsson, Magnus K.
    Carlsson, Ake
    FOOT & ANKLE INTERNATIONAL, 2018, 39 (11) : 1328 - 1334
  • [10] Transcultural adaptation and validation of the Spanish-French versions of the Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS)
    Belen Ortega-Avila, Ana
    Cervera-Garvi, Pablo
    Miguel Morales-Asencio, Jose
    Lescure, Yves
    De la Croix, Sebastian
    Coster, Maria C.
    Gijon-Nogueron, Gabriel
    DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION, 2022, 44 (12) : 2896 - 2901