Problems persist in reporting of methods and results for the WOMAC measure in hip and knee osteoarthritis trials.
Problems persist in reporting of methods and results for the WOMAC measure in hip and knee osteoarthritis trials.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11136-018-1978-1
复制
发表时间：
2019-03
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Cook JA
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Copsey B;Thompson JY;Vadher K;Ali U;Dutton SJ;Fitzpatrick R;Lamb SE;Cook JA
西部安大略省和麦克马斯特大学关节炎指数(WOMAC)是骨关节炎的常用结果衡量标准。WOMAC有不同的版本(Likert，视觉模拟或数字标尺)。2010年之前发表的一项试验回顾发现，WOMAC的报告很差，使用方式也不一致。这篇综述探讨了这些问题是否持续存在。这项系统性审查包括2016年发表的使用WOMAC的髋关节和/或膝骨性关节炎的随机试验。数据提取的内容包括WOMAC的使用版本、得分范围、分析和结果，以及这些细节是否被清楚地报告。这项综述包括62项试验，41项报告了WOMAC总分。在44%(n = 18/41)和24%(n = 10/41)的试验中，WOMAC总分的使用版本和条目范围不清楚。总分范围最小为0~10分(按24项0~10分平均计算)，最大总分为0~2400分(按0~100分24项总和计算)。所有试验都报告了统计分析方法，但只有29%的试验报告了组间平均差异和95%的可信区间。关于WOMAC的使用和评分的细节经常没有报道。我们建议试用报告WOMAC的版本和使用的分数范围。应报告组间处理效果和相应的可信区间。如果收集了WOMAC的所有条目，则应提供总分和单项分数。更好的报告将有助于在试验中对WOMAC分数进行解释、比较和综合。这篇文章的在线版本(10.1007/s11136-0181978-1)载有补充材料，授权用户可以使用。
The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) is a commonly used outcome measure for osteoarthritis. There are different versions of the WOMAC (Likert, visual analogue or numeric scales). A previous review of trials published before 2010 found poor reporting and inconsistency in how the WOMAC was used. This review explores whether these problems persist. This systematic review included randomised trials of hip and/or knee osteoarthritis published in 2016 that used the WOMAC. Data were extracted on the version used, score range, analysis and results of the WOMAC, and whether these details were clearly reported. This review included 62 trials and 41 reported the WOMAC total score. The version used and item range for the WOMAC total score were unclear in 44% (n = 18/41) and 24% (n = 10/41) of trials, respectively. The smallest total score range was 0–10 (calculated by averaging 24 items scored 0–10); the largest was 0–2400 (calculated by summing 24 items scored 0–100). All trials reported the statistical analysis methods but only 29% reported the between-group mean difference and 95% confidence interval. Details on the use and scoring of the WOMAC were often not reported. We recommend that trials report the version of the WOMAC and the score range used. The between-group treatment effect and corresponding confidence interval should be reported. If all the items of the WOMAC are collected, the total score and individual subscale scores should be presented. Better reporting would facilitate the interpretation, comparison and synthesis of the WOMAC score in trials. The online version of this article (10.1007/s11136-018-1978-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
7
作者：
Goldberg, V. M.;Buckwalter, J.;Wright, T.
通讯作者：
Wright, T.
影响因子：
3.5
作者：
McGrory, BJ;Harris, WH
通讯作者：
Harris, WH
影响因子：
2.8
作者：
Mithoefer K;Saris DB;Farr J;Kon E;Zaslav K;Cole BJ;Ranstam J;Yao J;Shive M;Levine D;Dalemans W;Brittberg M
通讯作者：
Brittberg M
影响因子：
4.7
作者：
Collins, Natalie J.;Misra, Devyani;Roos, Ewa M.
通讯作者：
Roos, Ewa M.
DOI：
10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.052
发表时间：
2011-03-01
影响因子：
2.5
作者：
Ahmad, M. A.;Xypnitos, F. N.;Giannoudis, P. V.
通讯作者：
Giannoudis, P. V.