Article

The aim of this study was to systematically review and compare the
measurement attributes of multidimensional, patient-reported outcome measures
used in hip and knee arthroplasty rehabilitation. METHODS: A search of PubMed,
CINAHL, Cochrane Central Registry, SCOPUS and PEDro databases up to December 2009
identified the validation studies. The quality of the measurement properties were
assessed based on the Terwee and Bot criteria, and Scientific Advisory Committee
of the Medical Outcomes Trust guidelines. RESULTS:
A total of 68 studies
examining 28 instruments were identified. Three instruments had positive ratings
for content validity. None of the instruments satisfied both factor analysis and
Cronbach's alpha criteria for internal consistency. Four measures were
positively-rated for agreement. Nine tools had positive ratings for construct
validity. Twenty-four of the instruments had indeterminate ratings for
responsiveness to clinical change. Only certain subscales of 2 instruments were
positively-rated for responsiveness to clinical change. CONCLUSION: A wide
variety of multidimensional patient-reported instruments has been used to assess
rehabilitation outcomes after hip and knee arthroplasty, but information about
their measurement attributes in these populations is inadequate. More data are
needed to clarify their reproducibility and responsiveness to clinical change. :

Langue : ANGLAIS