Ratings
1 Yes
2 No
3 Not evaluated or not reported
NA Not applicable
Outcome Measure IKDC Subjective Knee Form
Author’s Last Name Fu
Title of the Article Translation and validation of Chinese version of International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form
Year 2011
PubMed ID: 20969433
Reviewer’s Name Travis Hamilton
Date of Review 7.6.11
Content Validity
Reported that items were generated by team of experts NA Reported that items were developed from patient input NA Reported that content was developed from statistical modeling NA
Evaluated floor and ceiling effect NA; (No effects were observed in the 20 pt. cohort validation)
If yes. <30% of sample scored at endpoint
Data normally distributed NA
Was there a standard for translation? 1
If yes. How? Backward and Forward translation by professionals.
Construct Validity
Correlated with a generic instrument/scale 1
If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient SF-36 (Chinese version): PF = .64; RP = .50; BP = .64 Correlated with theoretically similar scale NA
If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient
Uncorrelated with theoretically distinct scale 1
If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient SF-36 (Chinese version): RE - .24; MH = .41 Tested specific hypothesis to demonstrate construct validity? NA
If yes. What is found? Criterion Validity
Correlated with “gold standard” NA
Predictive of a future outcome NA
If yes to either of above, report how this was demonstrated
Internal Consistency
Evidence for acceptable internal consistency 1
(eg.. Cronbach’s α > .60)
Test-Retest Reliability
Evidence for test-retest reliability (eg.. ICC>.70) 1
Indicate value: 0.87
Testing interval (time between repeated measures) 7 – 10 days Interrater Reliability
Evidence for interrater reliability (eg..Kappa > .60) NA Indicate Value:
Responsiveness
Group level statistics reported (eg. Effect size. Standardized response mean. Guyatt’s responsiveness index. Regression model) NA Report statistics: ES. SRM. Guyatt’s
Individual level statistics reported (eg. Minimal detectable change.
Minimum clinically important change) NA
Report statistics:
Change in measure related to change in external standard NA Measure demonstrated change for patients who received known
efficacious treatment (indicate statistic) NA Time interval between baseline and follow-up assessments
Descriptive Features
Age range of sample 52.6 (16-85)
Number: 84 Sex Male 54 Female 30 Diagnosis Table 1. ACL injury/surgery PCL injury/surgery Other ligament injury/surgery + ACL Meniscus. Articuler artroscopy +ACL OA PF General knee pain Combined injury Sport related Cartilage degeneration or surgery
Provide normative data NA
Provide information about scoring and weighting of items: NA Provided information about calculating with missing values: NA Recall period (eg. “in the last month”) 4-WEEKS Language(s) of instrument used in this report 1; chinese Is this the first or primary report about this instrument? 2
IKDC SUBJECTIVE KNEE FORM
Ratings
1 Yes
2 No
3 Not evaluated or not reported
NA Not applicable
Outcome Measure IKDC Subjective Knee Form – Pediatric Version
Author’s Last Name Schmitt
Title of the Article Validity and Internal Consistency of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form in Children and Adolescents
Year 2010
PubMed ID: 20805408
Reviewer’s Name Travis Hamilton
Date of Review 8.10.2011
Content Validity
Reported that items were generated by team of experts NA Reported that items were developed from patient input NA Reported that content was developed from statistical modeling NA
Evaluated floor and ceiling effect NA
If yes. <30% of sample scored at endpoint NA
Data normally distributed NA
Construct Validity
Correlated with a generic instrument/scale 1
If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient PedsQL PCS: r = 0.83 (pediatric, r = .84; adolescnet, r = .84; young adult, r = .79)
Correlated with theoretically similar scale NA If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient
Uncorrelated with theoretically distinct scale NA If yes. Indicate instrument/scale and correlation coefficient
Tested specific hypothesis to demonstrate construct validity? NA If yes. What is found?
Criterion Validity
Correlated with “gold standard” NA
Predictive of a future outcome
If yes to either of above, report how this was demonstrated Internal Consistency
Evidence for acceptable internal consistency 1
(eg.. Cronbach’s α > .60)
Test-Retest Reliability
Evidence for test-retest reliability (eg.. ICC>.70) NA Indicate value:
Testing interval (time between repeated measures) Interrater Reliability
Evidence for interrater reliability (eg..Kappa > .60) NA Indicate Value:
Responsiveness
Group level statistics reported (eg. Effect size. Standardized response mean. Guyatt’s responsiveness index. Regression model) NA Report statistics: ES. SRM. Guyatt’s
Individual level statistics reported (eg. Minimal detectable change.
Minimum clinically important change) NA
Report statistics:
Change in measure related to change in external standard NA Measure demonstrated change for patients who received known
efficacious treatment (indicate statistic) NA Time interval between baseline and follow-up assessments
Descriptive Features
Age range of sample 6-18
Number: 673 Sex Male 312 Female 361 Diagnosis Table 2. ACL injury/surgery PCL injury/surgery Other ligament injury/surgery + ACL Meniscus. Articuler artroscopy +ACL OA PF General knee pain Combined injury Sport related Cartilage degeneration or surgery
Provide normative data NA
Provide information about scoring and weighting of items: NA Provided information about calculating with missing values: NA
Recall period (eg. “in the last month”) 4 WEEKS
Language(s) of instrument used in this report English Is this the first or primary report about this instrument? 2
Notes:
3 items deleted were questions 2 (pain frequency), 3 (pain severity), and 6 (locking/catching) did not appreciably influence internal consistency. However the data indicate that the items may contribute to measurement error in the age group studied.
Lysholm Knee Score
Tegner (2) Bengtsson (3) Risberg (4) Marx (5) Paxton (6) Study Characteristics
Purpose Reliability, validity Sensitivity, Reliability Sensitivity Reliability, validity, responsiveness Validity, Reliability Study
Population/Sample
(inclusion/exclusion) ACL injury
ACL, MT, PFPS, and
LAS injury*** ACL + combined injury Variety of knee injuries Acute patellar dislocation Number 76 31 120 Reliability = 41, Validity = 133,
Responsiveness = 42 Validity = 110, Test=retest = 81 Age range (average ± SD, min- max) 27 ACL = 26.3 ± 7.8; MT = 39.1 ± 13.8; PFPS = 24.1 ± 7.0; LAS 29.8 ± 5.6 27.8 Reliability = 32.6 (16- 60), Validity = 31.5 (14- 65), Responsiveness = 30.9 (15-61)
Validity =First dislocation: 16 (9-67), Prior dislocation: 18 (8-65) Test-retest= First dislocation: 16 (9-48), Prior dislocation: 22 (8-65) Sex (% female) 28% NA 47% Reliability = 51%, Validity = 48%,
Responsiveness = 54% NA Reliability
Internal consistency NA NA NA NA α = 0.71 Test-retest reliability Intrapersonal CC = .97 Interpersonal CC = .90
Days 1-3: t = 0.75; Days 1-14: t = 0.69; Days 3 – 14: t = 0.68 (Kendall's correlation)
NA ICC = 0.95 r = 0.88 Time interval 2 weeks 1-3 days, 1-14 days, 3-14 days NA 5 days 21 days Validity Correlation to similar scale Excellent (100%) correlation to similar scales NA Little (29%) Fair (25%), Moderate (29%), Excellent (16%) Moderate (50%), Excellent (50%) correlation to similar scales Little (50%), Excellent (50%) correlation to similar scales Correlation to general measures of Physical function NA NA NA Fair (33.3%), Moderate (66.6%) correlation to general measures of physical function Fair (66.6%), Moderate (33.3%) correlation to general measures of physical function Correlation to general measures of mental function NA NA NA Little (50%), Fair (50%) correlation to general measures of mental function NA Responsiveness ES NA NA NA NA NA SRM NA NA NA 0.9 NA MDC NA NA NA 11.6 (calc) NA MCID NA NA NA NA NA Guyatt NA NA NA NA NA
Time Interval NA NA 3, 6, 12, 24 months (scores) NA NA Other
Floor/Ceiling Effect NA NA NA No No Normal Distribution NA NA NA NA No Normal Data NA NA NA NA NA *** MT - Meniscus Tear, PFPS - Patello-femoral Pain Syndrome, LAS - Lateral Ankle Sprain
Lysholm Knee Score Continued
Kocher (7) Briggs (8) Heintjes (9) Briggs (10) Study Characteristics
Purpose Reliability, Responsiveness Validity, Reliability, Responsiveness Reliability, validity, responsiveness Reliability, validity, responsiveness Study
Population/Sample (inclusion/exclusion)
Patients with Choldral
lesions Meniscal Injury General knee complaints ACL (plus concurrent) injuries Number 76 Test-retest group = 122, Validity group 1 = 191,
Validity group 2 = 477 314 Reliability = 41, Validity = 133, Responsiveness = 42 Age range (average ± SD, min-max) 27 Test-retest group = 48 (14- 76), Validity group 1 = 40 (13-81), Validity group 2 = 39 (18-62) 24.6 ± 7.5 (12-35) Reliability = 32.6 (16-60), Validity = 31.5 (14-65), Responsiveness = 30.9 (15-61)
Sex (% female) 28% Test-retest group = 36%, Validity group 1 = 32%,
Validity group 2 = 23% 44% Reliability = 51%, Validity = 48%, Responsiveness = 54% Reliability Internal consistency α = 0.65 α = 0.729 NA α = .72 Test-retest reliability ICC = 0.91 ICC = 0.92 NA ICC = 0.94 Time interval 4 weeks 4 weeks NA 4 weeks Validity
Correlation to similar scale Little (100%) correlation to similar scales NA
Little (29%) Fair (25%), Moderate (29%), Excellent (16%)
Excellent (100%)
correlation to similar scales Correlation to general
measures of Physical function
Fair (33.3%), Moderate (66.6%) correlation to general measures of physical function Moderate (100%) correlation to measures of physical function NA Fair (100%) correlation general measures of physical function Correlation to general
measures of mental function NA NA NA
Little (100%)correlation to general measures of mental function Responsiveness
ES 1.16 Validity Group 1 = 1.2, Validity Group 2 = 1.2 Traumatic pts = 1.15 Nontraumatic pts = 0.76 6mo. = 1.0 , 9mo. = 1.0, 12mo. = 1.1, 24mo. = 1.1 SRM 1.1 Validity Group 1 =0.97, Validity Group 2 = 1.13 Traumatic pts = 1.14 Nontraumatic pts = 0.73 6mo. = 0.925 , 9mo. = 1.1, 12mo. = 1.2, 24mo. = 0.93 MDC 15.8 (calc) 15.2 (calc) NA 8.9
MCID NA 10.1 NA NA
Guyatt NA NA Traumatic pts = 0.94 Nontraumatic pts = 1.11 NA
Time Interval 52 months 12 months 12 months 6, 9, 12, 24 months Other
Floor/Ceiling Effect No No No No Normal Distribution NA NA NA Yes
Normal Data NA NA NA NA
Demirdjian (11) Study Characteristics
Purpose Normative Data Study
Population/Sample (inclusion/exclusion)
High School and College Students Number 246 Age range (average ± SD, min-max) 17.6 (13 – 25) Sex (% female) 40% Reliability Internal consistency NA Test-retest reliability NA Time interval NA Validity
Correlation to similar scale NA Correlation to general
measures of Physical function NA Correlation to general
measures of mental function NA Responsiveness ES NA SRM NA MDC NA MCID NA Guyatt NA Time Interval NA Other Floor/Ceiling Effect NA Normal Distribution NA Normal Data Yes
LYSHOLM STUDY CONSOLIDATION REFERENCES
2) Tegner Y, Lysholm J. Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985; 198:43-9
3) Bengtsson J, Mollborg J, Werner S. A study for testing the sensitivity and reliability of the Lysholm knee scoring scale. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrose 1996; 4: 27-31
4) Risberg MA, Holm I, Sten H, Beynnon BD. Sensitivity to changes over time for the IKDC form, the Lysholm score, and the Cincinnati knee score a prospective study of 120 ACL reconstructed patients with a 2 year follow up Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthroscopy 1999 7: 152-59
5) Marx RG, Jones EC, Allen AA, Altchek DW, O'Brien SJ, Rodeo SA, Williams RJ, Warren RF, Wickiewics TL.
Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of four knee outcome scales for athletic patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001; 83: 1459-69
6) Paxton EW, Fithian DC, Stone ML, Silvia P. The reliability and validity of knee specific and general health instruments in assessing acute patellar dislocation outcomes. Am J Sports Med 2003; 31 : 487-92
7) Kocher MS, Steadman JR, Briggs KK, Sterett WI, Hawkins RJ. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Lysholm knee scale for various chondral disorders of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg AM. 2004; 86: 1139-45
8) Briggs KK, Kosher MS, Rodkey WG, Steadman JR. Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of the Lysholm Knee Score and Tegner Activity Scale for Patients with Meniscal Injury of the Knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006; 88(4): 698-705
9) Heintjes EM, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Berger MY, Koes BW. Lysholm scale and WOMAC index were responsive in prospective cohort of young general practice patients. J Clin Epidemol. 2008; 61 (5): 481-8
10) Briggs K, Lysholm J, Tegner Y, Rodkey WG, Kosher MS, Steadman R. Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of the Lysholm Knee Score and Tegner Activity Scale for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries of the Knee: 25 years later. Am J Sports Med, 2009; 37: 890-897
11) Demirdjian AM, Petrie SG, Guanche CA, Thomas KA. The outcomes of two knee scoring questionnaires in a normal population. Am J Sports Med. 1998 Jan-Feb;26(1):46-51