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.
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.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s00776-005-0937-1
复制
发表时间：
2005-09
影响因子：
1.7
通讯作者：
Tatsunami, S
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Niki, H;Aoki, H;Inokuchi, S;Ozeki, S;Kinoshita, M;Kura, H;Tanaka, Y;Noguchi, M;Nomura, S;Hatori, M;Tatsunami, S
本研究评估了(1)日本足部外科学会（JSSF）四个部位[踝关节-后足（AH）、足中（MF）、拇趾（HL）和小脚趾（LT）]的标准评分系统和类风湿关节炎（RA）足部和踝关节量表以及(2)日本骨科协会足部评分量表（JOA量表）的效度和临床内外信度。来自同一研究所的临床医生每隔1至4周对其研究所的参与患者进行两次独立评估。统计评价如下。(1)类内相关系数（ICC）由至少两名临床医生对每位患者进行至少两次检查收集的数据计算（数据A）。(2)两次评估的总得分由两次评估之间数据差异的分布确定（数据B）；每个项目通过确定科恩的同意系数来评估。(3)患者满意度与总分的关系仅针对手术患者进行调查（数据C）。得到Spearman等级相关系数。参与者是65名临床医生和610名患者，包括AH（313）、MF（47）、HL（153）、LT（50）和RA（47）患者。从数据A来看，JSSF量表中AH和HL的ICC较高，JOA量表中AH、MF和LT的ICC较高。从数据B可以看出，两种量表对AH的系数都具有较高的效度，两种量表之间几乎没有差异；JOA量表对HL的效度高于JSSF量表。从数据C来看，JSSF量表对AH和HL的患者满意度和JOA量表对AH、HL和LT的患者满意度与结果之间存在显著相关性。两种量表的效度均较高。使用这些量表对治疗结果进行临床评价是高度可靠的。
This study evaluated the validity and inter- and intraclinician reliability of (1) the Japanese Society of Surgery of the Foot (JSSF) standard rating system for four sites [ankle-hindfoot (AH), midfoot (MF), hallux (HL), and lesser toe (LT)] and the rheumatoid arthritis (RA) foot and ankle scale and (2) the Japanese Orthopaedic Association’s foot rating scale (JOA scale). Clinicians from the same institute independently evaluated participating patients from their institute by two evaluations at a 1- to 4-week interval. Statistical evaluation was as follows. (1) The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated from data collected from at least two examinations of each patient by at least two evaluating clinicians (Data A). (2) Total scores for the two evaluations were determined from the distribution of differences in data between the two evaluations (Data B); each item was evaluated by determining Cohen’s coefficient of agreement. (3) The relation between patient satisfaction and total score was investigated only for patients who underwent surgery (Data C). Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was obtained. Participants were 65 clinicians and 610 patients, including those with disorders of the AH (313), MF (47), HL (153), and LT (50) and those with RA (47). From Data A, the ICC was high for AH and HL by JSSF scales and for AH, MF, and LT by the JOA scale. From Data B, the coefficient showed high validity for both scales for AH, with almost no difference between the two scales; the validity for HL was higher with the JOA scale than with the JSSF scale. From Data C, correlations were significant between patient satisfaction and outcome for AH and HL by the JSSF scales and for AH, HL, and LT by the JOA scale. The validity of both scales was high. Clinical evaluation of the therapeutic results using these scales would be highly reliable.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Toolan, BC;Quinones, VJW;Brage, ME
通讯作者：
Brage, ME
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
Rome, K;Cowieson, F
通讯作者：
Cowieson, F
DOI：
10.2106/00004623-199808000-00006
发表时间：
1998-08-01
影响因子：
5.3
作者：
Irrgang, JJ;Snyder-Mackler, L;Harner, CD
通讯作者：
Harner, CD
DOI：
10.2106/00004623-200405000-00003
发表时间：
2004-05-01
影响因子：
5.3
作者：
Johanson, NA;Liang, MH;Richmond, J
通讯作者：
Richmond, J
影响因子：
2.7
作者：
KITAOKA, HB;ALEXANDER, IJ;SANDERS, M
通讯作者：
SANDERS, M