Measuring hip outcomes: Common scales and checklists
Measuring hip outcomes: Common scales and checklists
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.052
复制
发表时间：
2011-03-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Giannoudis, P. V.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ahmad, M. A.;Xypnitos, F. N.;Giannoudis, P. V.
引言：评估手术干预后患者的结局是一项具有挑战性的任务。传统上，关节置换术的最终结果基于发病率/死亡率和手术并发症。骨科手术后结局的现代方法已从植入物的成功或失败转向患者满意度和生活质量。本文的目的是识别和分析常见的评分系统，目前在医学文献中评估髋关节interventions.Methods后的结果：一个公共医学搜索进行使用术语“评分系统，功能结果，髋关节”。具体的限制和排除标准，并在研究中纳入的文章的参考文献列表进行了进一步的分析，以确定额外的相关paper.Results：293篇文章，其中40符合纳入标准。结局指标分为：（i）髋关节特异性结局，（ii）疾病特异性指标和（iii）一般生活质量指标。根据我们的分析，我们建议结合髋关节特异性牛津髋关节评分（OHS）和疾病特异性WOMAC评分。OHS是快速和容易完成，有一个非常高的响应率，是从临床医生的偏见。另一方面，大多数髋关节病理学与退行性疾病相关，因此WOMAC是最适合使用的测量方法。在不同的条件之间的比较是必需的，然后一个额外的通用生活质量（QOL）评分，如EQ 5D，可以使比较在成本效益term can be used.Conclusion：理想的结果的措施应该是一个具体的髋关节，拥有一个通用的组件，并考虑到并发症和使用助行器。尽管存在许多经验证的通用指标，但需要进行额外的验证研究（包括OHS），以评价所有髋关节特定的结局指标。(C)2010爱思唯尔有限公司版权所有。
Introduction: Assessing the outcomes of patients following surgical interventions is a challenging task. Traditionally the end results of joint replacement were based on morbidity/mortality rates and operative complications. The modern approach to outcomes following Orthopaedic surgery has shifted from the success or failure of implants towards patient satisfaction and the quality of life achieved. The aim of this paper was to identify and analyse the common scoring systems present in the medical literature for evaluating outcomes after hip interventions.Methods: A pub-med search was performed using terms 'scoring system, functional outcomes, hip joint'. Specific limitations and exclusion criteria were used and the reference lists of the articles included in the study were subjected to further analysis for identification of additional relevant papers.Results: 293 articles were identified of which 40 met the inclusion criteria. The outcome measures were divided into: (i) hip specific outcomes, (ii) disease-specific measures and (iii) generic quality of life measures. Based on our analysis, we would recommend a combination of the hip specific Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the disease specific WOMAC score. The OHS is quick and easy to complete, has a very high response rate and is free from clinician bias. On the other hand, the majority of hip pathology is related to degenerative disease, thus making the WOMAC the most appropriate measure to use. Where comparison between different conditions is required, then an additional generic quality of life (QOL) score, such as EQ5D, that can enable comparisons in cost-effectiveness term can be used.Conclusion: The ideal outcome measure should be one that is specific for the hip joint, possesses a generic component and takes into consideration co-morbidities and the use of walking aids. Although many validated generic measures exist, additional validation studies, including the OHS, are desirable to evaluate all the hip specific measures of outcome. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.