Rg. Marx et al., Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of four knee outcome scales for athletic patients, J BONE-AM V, 83A(10), 2001, pp. 1459-1469
Citations number
52
Categorie Soggetti
Ortopedics, Rehabilitation & Sport Medicine","da verificare
Background: Many patient-based knee-rating scales are available for the eva
luation of athletic patients. However, there is little information on the m
easurement properties of these instruments and therefore no evidence to sup
port the use of one questionnaire rather than another. The goal of the pres
ent study was to determine the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of
four knee-rating scales commonly used for the evaluation of athletic patie
nts: the Lysholm scale, the subjective components of the Cincinnati knee-ra
ting system, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons sports knee-ratin
g scale, and the Activities of Daily Living scale of the Knee Outcome Surve
y.
Methods: All patients in the study had a disorder of the knee and were acti
ve in sports (a Tegner score of greater than or equal to4 points). Forty-on
e patients who had a knee disorder that had stabilized and who were not rec
eiving treatment were administered all four questionnaires at baseline and
again at a mean of 5.2 days (range, two to fourteen days) later to test rel
iability. Forty-two patients were administered the scales at baseline and a
t a minimum of three months after treatment to test responsiveness. The res
ponses of 133 patients at baseline were studied to test construct validity.
Results: The reliability was high for all scales, with the intraclass corre
lation coefficient ranging from 0.88 to 0.95. As for construct validity, th
e correlations among the knee scales ranged from 0.70 to 0.85 and those bet
ween the knee scales and the physical component scale of the Short Form-36
(SF-36) and the patient and clinician severity ratings ranged from 0.59 to
0.77. Responsiveness, measured with the standardized response mean, ranged
from 0.8 for the Cincinnati knee-rating system to 1.1 for the Activities of
Daily Living scale.
Conclusions: All four scales satisfied our criteria for reliability, validi
ty, and responsiveness, and all are acceptable for use in clinical research
.