Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Orthopaedic Science 5/2011

01.09.2011 | Original Article

Development of the patient-based outcome instrument for foot and ankle: part 2: results from the second field survey: validity of the outcome instrument for the foot and ankle version 2

verfasst von: Hisateru Niki, Shinobu Tatsunami, Naoki Haraguchi, Takafumi Aoki, Ryuzo Okuda, Yasunori Suda, Masato Takao, Yasuhito Tanaka

Erschienen in: Journal of Orthopaedic Science | Ausgabe 5/2011

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

The Clinical Outcomes Committee of the Japanese Society for Surgery of the Foot (JSSF) has conducted the second Field Survey of the Outcome Instrument for the Foot and Ankle version 2.

Methods

The survey of the Outcome Instrument version 2, which was composed of 43 items, was performed in 313 patients (154 men and 159 women) who had pathological conditions related to the foot and ankle. Optional sports items in the Outcome Instrument version 2 were analyzed in 123 patients. Internal consistency and construct validity of the Outcome Instrument version 2 were assessed. Correlation of the Outcome Instrument version 2 score with Short Form 36 (SF36) and JSSF scores was analyzed to evaluate criterion validity.

Results

Both the EFA and CFA demonstrated good alignment of questionnaire items with their intended subscales in most cases. Sports items were not clearly classified into subgroups. Therefore, it seemed reasonable to use those as a set of questions in a single subscale. The present subscales, having similar names as the SF36 subscales, were closely correlated with the respective subscales. In those cases, the magnitude of the correlation coefficient was >0.6 (p < 0.001) except the present subscale called General Health and Well-being. Comparison of the present scores with JSSF evaluation scores showed satisfactory results except in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Conclusions

The Outcome Instrument version 2 demonstrated acceptable psychometric performances as outcome measures for patients with pathological conditions related to the foot and ankle. This outcome instrument would be helpful to evaluate patients with foot and/or ankle impairment. However, the analyses of the test-retest reliability and the influence of background factors such as age and gender, etc., on Outcome Instrument version 2 are needed in the third field survey.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Niki H, Aoki H, Inokuchi S, Ozeki S, Kinoshita M, Kura H, Tanaka Y, Noguchi M, Nomura S, Hatori M, Tatsunami S. Development and reliability of a standard rating system for outcome measurement of foot and ankle disorders I: development of standard rating system. J Orthop Sci. 2005;10:457–65.PubMedCrossRef Niki H, Aoki H, Inokuchi S, Ozeki S, Kinoshita M, Kura H, Tanaka Y, Noguchi M, Nomura S, Hatori M, Tatsunami S. Development and reliability of a standard rating system for outcome measurement of foot and ankle disorders I: development of standard rating system. J Orthop Sci. 2005;10:457–65.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Niki H, Aoki H, Inokuchi S, Ozeki S, Kinoshita M, Kura H, Tanaka Y, Noguchi M, Nomura S, Hatori M, Tatsunami S. Development and reliability of a standard rating system for outcome measurement of foot and ankle disorders II: interclinician and intraclinician reliability and validity of the newly established standard rating scales and Japanese Orthopaedic Association rating scale. J Orthop Sci. 2005;10:466–74.PubMedCrossRef Niki H, Aoki H, Inokuchi S, Ozeki S, Kinoshita M, Kura H, Tanaka Y, Noguchi M, Nomura S, Hatori M, Tatsunami S. Development and reliability of a standard rating system for outcome measurement of foot and ankle disorders II: interclinician and intraclinician reliability and validity of the newly established standard rating scales and Japanese Orthopaedic Association rating scale. J Orthop Sci. 2005;10:466–74.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Niki H, Tatsunami S, Haraguchi N, Aoki T, Okuda R, Suda Y, Takao M, Tanaka Y. Development of the patient-based outcome instrument for the foot and ankle. Part 1: project description and evaluation of the outcome instrument version 1. J Orthop Sci. 2011. doi:10.1007/s00776-011-0130-7. Niki H, Tatsunami S, Haraguchi N, Aoki T, Okuda R, Suda Y, Takao M, Tanaka Y. Development of the patient-based outcome instrument for the foot and ankle. Part 1: project description and evaluation of the outcome instrument version 1. J Orthop Sci. 2011. doi:10.​1007/​s00776-011-0130-7.
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Kaikkonen A, Kannus P, Jarvinen M. A performance test protocol and scoring scale for the evaluation of ankle injuries. Am J Sports Med. 1994;22:462–9.PubMedCrossRef Kaikkonen A, Kannus P, Jarvinen M. A performance test protocol and scoring scale for the evaluation of ankle injuries. Am J Sports Med. 1994;22:462–9.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Pugia ML, Middel CJ, Seward SW, Pollock JL, Hall RC, Lowe L, Mahony L, Henderson NE. Comparison of acute swelling and function in subjects with lateral ankle injury. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2001;31:384–8.PubMed Pugia ML, Middel CJ, Seward SW, Pollock JL, Hall RC, Lowe L, Mahony L, Henderson NE. Comparison of acute swelling and function in subjects with lateral ankle injury. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2001;31:384–8.PubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Seligson D, Gassman J, Pope M. Ankle instability: evaluation of the lateral ligaments. Am J Sports Med. 1980;8:39–42.PubMedCrossRef Seligson D, Gassman J, Pope M. Ankle instability: evaluation of the lateral ligaments. Am J Sports Med. 1980;8:39–42.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Williams GN, Molloy JM, DeBerardino TM, Arciero RA, Taylor DC. Evaluation of the sports ankle rating system in young, athletic, individuals with acute lateral ankle sprains. Foot Ankle Int. 2003;24:274–82.PubMed Williams GN, Molloy JM, DeBerardino TM, Arciero RA, Taylor DC. Evaluation of the sports ankle rating system in young, athletic, individuals with acute lateral ankle sprains. Foot Ankle Int. 2003;24:274–82.PubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Martin RL, Irrgang JJ, Burdett RG, Conti SF, Van Swearingen JM. Evidence of validity for the foot and ankle ability measure (FAAM). Foot Ankle Int. 2005;26:968–83.PubMed Martin RL, Irrgang JJ, Burdett RG, Conti SF, Van Swearingen JM. Evidence of validity for the foot and ankle ability measure (FAAM). Foot Ankle Int. 2005;26:968–83.PubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Fukuhara S, Suzukamo Y. Manual of SF-36v2 Japanese version. Institute for Health Outcomes and Process Evaluation Research, Kyoto; 2004. Fukuhara S, Suzukamo Y. Manual of SF-36v2 Japanese version. Institute for Health Outcomes and Process Evaluation Research, Kyoto; 2004.
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Budiman-Mak E, Conrad KJ, Roach KE. The foot function index: a measure of foot pain and disability. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44:561–70.PubMedCrossRef Budiman-Mak E, Conrad KJ, Roach KE. The foot function index: a measure of foot pain and disability. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44:561–70.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Bennett PJ, Patterson C, Wearing S, Baglioni T. Development and validation of a questionnaire designed to measure foot-health status. J Am Pediatr Med Assoc. 1998;88:419–28. Bennett PJ, Patterson C, Wearing S, Baglioni T. Development and validation of a questionnaire designed to measure foot-health status. J Am Pediatr Med Assoc. 1998;88:419–28.
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Alcock GK, Stratford PW. Validation of the lower extremity function scale on athletic subjects with ankle sprains. Physiother Can. 2002;54:233–40. Alcock GK, Stratford PW. Validation of the lower extremity function scale on athletic subjects with ankle sprains. Physiother Can. 2002;54:233–40.
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Martin RL, Irrgang JJ, Lalonde KA, Conti SF. Current concepts review: foot and ankle outcome instruments. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27:383–90.PubMed Martin RL, Irrgang JJ, Lalonde KA, Conti SF. Current concepts review: foot and ankle outcome instruments. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27:383–90.PubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Martin RL, Irrgang JW. A survey of self-reported outcome instruments for foot and ankle. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 37;2007:72–84. Martin RL, Irrgang JW. A survey of self-reported outcome instruments for foot and ankle. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 37;2007:72–84.
Metadaten
Titel
Development of the patient-based outcome instrument for foot and ankle: part 2: results from the second field survey: validity of the outcome instrument for the foot and ankle version 2
verfasst von
Hisateru Niki
Shinobu Tatsunami
Naoki Haraguchi
Takafumi Aoki
Ryuzo Okuda
Yasunori Suda
Masato Takao
Yasuhito Tanaka
Publikationsdatum
01.09.2011
Verlag
Springer Japan
Erschienen in
Journal of Orthopaedic Science / Ausgabe 5/2011
Print ISSN: 0949-2658
Elektronische ISSN: 1436-2023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-011-0131-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2011

Journal of Orthopaedic Science 5/2011 Zur Ausgabe

Arthropedia

Grundlagenwissen der Arthroskopie und Gelenkchirurgie. Erweitert durch Fallbeispiele, Videos und Abbildungen. 
» Jetzt entdecken

Proximale Humerusfraktur: Auch 100-Jährige operieren?

01.05.2024 DCK 2024 Kongressbericht

Mit dem demographischen Wandel versorgt auch die Chirurgie immer mehr betagte Menschen. Von Entwicklungen wie Fast-Track können auch ältere Menschen profitieren und bei proximaler Humerusfraktur können selbst manche 100-Jährige noch sicher operiert werden.

Sind Frauen die fähigeren Ärzte?

30.04.2024 Gendermedizin Nachrichten

Patienten, die von Ärztinnen behandelt werden, dürfen offenbar auf bessere Therapieergebnisse hoffen als Patienten von Ärzten. Besonders gilt das offenbar für weibliche Kranke, wie eine Studie zeigt.

Notfall-TEP der Hüfte ist auch bei 90-Jährigen machbar

26.04.2024 Hüft-TEP Nachrichten

Ob bei einer Notfalloperation nach Schenkelhalsfraktur eine Hemiarthroplastik oder eine totale Endoprothese (TEP) eingebaut wird, sollte nicht allein vom Alter der Patientinnen und Patienten abhängen. Auch über 90-Jährige können von der TEP profitieren.

Arthroskopie kann Knieprothese nicht hinauszögern

25.04.2024 Gonarthrose Nachrichten

Ein arthroskopischer Eingriff bei Kniearthrose macht im Hinblick darauf, ob und wann ein Gelenkersatz fällig wird, offenbar keinen Unterschied.

Update Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.