Good validity and reliability of the forgotten joint score in evaluating the outcome of total knee arthroplasty

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Background and purpose

When evaluating the outcome after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), increasing emphasis has been put on patient satisfaction and ability to perform activities of daily living. To address this, the forgotten joint score (FJS) for assessment of knee awareness has been developed. We investigated the validity and reliability of the FJS.

Patients and methods

A Danish version of the FJS questionnaire was created according to internationally accepted standards. 360 participants who underwent primary TKA were invited to participate in the study. Of these, 315 were included in a validity study and 150 in a reliability study. Correlation between the Oxford knee score (OKS) and the FJS was examined and test-retest evaluation was performed. A ceiling effect was defined as participants reaching a score within 15% of the maximum achievable score.

Results

The validity study revealed a strong correlation between the FJS and the OKS (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.77–0.85; p < 0.001). The test-retest evaluation showed almost perfect reliability for the FJS total score (ICC = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.88–0.94) and substantial reliability or better for individual items of the FJS (ICC? 0.79). We found a high level of internal consistency (Cronbach’s? = 0.96). The ceiling effect for the FJS was 16%, as compared to 37% for the OKS.

Interpretation

The FJS showed good construct validity and test-retest reliability. It had a lower ceiling effect than the OKS. The FJS appears to be a promising tool for evaluation of small differences in knee performance in groups of patients with good clinical results after TKA.

Related collections

Most cited references 24

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement.

J Dawson, R. Fitzpatrick, D. Murray … (1998)

We have developed a 12-item questionnaire for patients having a total knee replacement (TKR). We made a prospective study of 117 patients before operation and at follow-up six months later, asking them to complete the new questionnaire and the form SF36. Some also filled in the Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ). An orthopaedic surgeon completed the American Knee Society (AKS) clinical score. The single score derived from the new questionnaire had high internal consistency, and its reproducibility, examined by test-retest reliability, was found to be satisfactory. Its validity was established by obtaining significant correlations in the expected direction with the AKS scores and the relevant parts of the SF36 and HAQ. Sensitivity to change was assessed by analysing the differences between the preoperative scores and those at follow-up. We also compared change in scores with the patients' retrospective judgement of change in their condition. The effect size for the new questionnaire compared favourably with those for the relevant parts of the SF36. The change scores for the new knee questionnaire were significantly greater (p < 0.0001) for patients who reported the most improvement in their condition. The new questionnaire provides a measure of outcome for TKR that is short, practical, reliable, valid and sensitive to clinically important changes over time.

0 comments Cited 160 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Comparative responsiveness of outcome measures for total knee arthroplasty

K. Giesinger, D.F. Hamilton, B. Jost … (2014)

Summary Objective The aim of this study was to compare the responsiveness of various patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and clinician-reported outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) over a 2-year period. Methods Data were collected in a prospective cohort study of primary TKA. Patients who had completed Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis (OA) index, EQ-5D, Knee Society Score and range of movement (ROM) assessment were included. Five time points were assessed: pre-operative, 2 months, 6 months, 1 year and 2 years post-operative. Results Data from 98 TKAs were available for analysis. Largest effect sizes (ES) for change from pre-operative to 2-month follow-up were observed for the Knee Society Score (KSS) Knee score (1.70) and WOMAC Total (−1.50). For the period from 6 months to 1 year the largest ES for change were shown by the FJS-12 (0.99) and the KSS Function Score (0.88). The EQ-5D showed the strongest ceiling effect at 1-year follow-up with 84.4% of patients scoring the maximum score. ES for the time from 1- to 2-year follow-up were largest for the FJS-12 (0.50). All other outcome measures showed ES equal or below 0.30. Conclusion Outcome measures differ considerably in responsiveness, especially beyond one year post-operatively. Joint-specific outcome measures are more responsive than clinician-reported or generic health outcome tools. The FJS-12 was the most responsive of the tools assessed; suggesting that joint awareness may be a more discerning measure of patient outcome than traditional PROMs.

0 comments Cited 46 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Measuring improvement following total hip and knee arthroplasty using patient-based measures of outcome.

Robert Marx, Edward Jones, Nawal Atwan … (2005)

Patient-derived outcome scales have become increasingly important to physicians and clinical researchers for measuring improvement in function after surgery. The goal of the present study was to evaluate the ability of health-status instruments to measure early functional recovery after total hip and total knee arthroplasty. Four hundred and six patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty and 266 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty completed health-status questionnaires preoperatively and six months postoperatively to determine the standardized response mean. In the second phase of the study, a group of patients undergoing knee and hip arthroplasty were evaluated with several instruments before and after surgery to test for postoperative ceiling effects. The standardized response mean at six months was 1.7 for the MODEMS Hip Core, 1.2 for the MODEMS Knee Core, and 1.5 and 1.1 for the Physical Component Summary of the SF-36 for patients managed with hip and knee replacement, respectively. A standardized response mean of 1.0 is generally satisfactory for measuring improvement in orthopaedic surgery. In Phase 2 of the study, the vast majority of patients who had a score of 95 to 100 (that is, a maximum or near-maximum score) on the joint-specific scales generally believed that the hip or knee was normal and could not be better. The MODEMS, Oxford, and WOMAC scales all demonstrated a ceiling effect following total knee and total hip arthroplasty. These scores likely reflected the patients' perception of the status of the knee or hip rather than an inability to measure their improvement beyond the highest possible score. The Physical Component Summary score of the SF-36 had similar standardized response means when compared with hip and knee-specific instruments, and, therefore, consideration should be given to using this scale without a joint-specific scale for the measurement of improvement following total knee and total hip replacement, as a way to decrease responder burden (that is, the time required to complete the questionnaires).

0 comments Cited 43 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Journal ID (nlm-ta): Acta Orthop

Journal ID (iso-abbrev): Acta Orthop

Journal ID (publisher-id): IORT

Title: Acta Orthopaedica

Publisher: Taylor & Francis

ISSN (Print): 1745-3674

ISSN (Electronic): 1745-3682

Publication date (Print): June 2016

Publication date (Electronic): 29 February 2016

Volume: 87

Issue: 3

Pages: 280-285

Affiliations

[1 ]Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark.,

[2 ]Clinical Research Center, Copenhagen University Hospital, Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Author notes

[* ]Correspondence: morten@ 123456grovethomsen.dk

Article

Publisher ID: iort-87-280

DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2016.1156934

PMC ID: 4900097

PubMed ID: 26937689

SO-VID: aae28c64-1f23-4e60-9cfa-395e8afd07fa

License:

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0)

Good validity and reliability of the forgotten joint score in evaluating the outcome of total knee arthroplasty : A retrospective cross-sectional survey-based study

Read this article at

Abstract

Background and purpose

Patients and methods

Results

Interpretation

Related collections

Orthopedics

Most cited references 24

Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement.

Comparative responsiveness of outcome measures for total knee arthroplasty

Measuring improvement following total hip and knee arthroplasty using patient-based measures of outcome.

Author and article information

Journal

Affiliations

Author notes

Article

History

Categories

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 243

Cited by 46

Most referenced authors 684