Validity of five foot and ankle specific electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) instruments in patients undergoing elective orthopedic foot or ankle surgery |
| |
| Authors: | Mikko M. Uimonen Ville T. Ponkilainen Alar Toom Mikko Miettinen Arja H. Häkkinen Henrik Sandelin Antti O. Latvala Timo Sirola Mika Sampo Risto P. Roine Jan Lindahl Outi Ilves Anna Sandbacka Jussi P. Repo |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Surgery, Central Finland Central Hospital, Jyväskylä, Finland;2. Faculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland;3. Department of Physical Medicine, Central Finland Healthcare District, Jyväskylä, Finland;4. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland;5. Division of Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery, Department of Surgery, Medical Research Center Oulu, Oulu University Hospital, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland;6. Comprehensive Cancer Center, Helsinki University Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland;7. Group Administration, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, HUS, Helsinki, Finland;8. Department of Health and Social Management, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland |
| |
| Abstract: | BackgroundPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) are widely accepted measures for evaluating outcomes of surgical interventions. As patient-reported information is stored in electronic health records, it is essential that there are valid electronic PRO (ePRO) instruments available for clinicians and researchers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of electronic versions of five widely used foot and ankle specific PRO instruments.MethodsAltogether 111 consecutive elective foot/ankle surgery patients were invited face-to-face to participate in this study. Patients completed electronic versions of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), the modified Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS), the Manchester–Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ), and the Visual Analogue Scale Foot and Ankle (VAS-FA) on the day of elective foot and/or ankle surgery. Construct validity, coverage, and targeting of the scales were assessed.ResultsBased on general and predefined thresholds, construct validity, coverage, and targeting of the ePRO versions of the FAAM, the FAOS, the MOXFQ, and the VAS-FA were acceptable. Major issues arose with score distribution and convergent validity of the modified LEFS instrument.ConclusionsThe ePRO versions of the FAAM, the FAOS, the MOXFQ, and the VAS-FA provide valid scores for foot and ankle patients. However, our findings do not support the use of the modified LEFS as an electronic outcome measure for patients with orthopedic foot and/or ankle pathologies. |
| |
| Keywords: | ePRO Foot Ankle Validation Psychometrics Clinimetrics Patient-reported outcome |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
