Cargando…

The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Harris hip score (HHS), a disease-specific health status scale that is frequently used to measure the outcome of total hip arthroplasty, has never been validated properly. A questionnaire is suitable only when all 5 psychometric properties are of sufficient quality. We qu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wamper, Kim E, Sierevelt, Inger N, Poolman, Rudolf W, Bhandari, Mohit, Haverkamp, Daniël
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Informa Healthcare 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3216080/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21110703
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2010.537808
_version_ 1782216468920795136
author Wamper, Kim E
Sierevelt, Inger N
Poolman, Rudolf W
Bhandari, Mohit
Haverkamp, Daniël
author_facet Wamper, Kim E
Sierevelt, Inger N
Poolman, Rudolf W
Bhandari, Mohit
Haverkamp, Daniël
author_sort Wamper, Kim E
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Harris hip score (HHS), a disease-specific health status scale that is frequently used to measure the outcome of total hip arthroplasty, has never been validated properly. A questionnaire is suitable only when all 5 psychometric properties are of sufficient quality. We questioned the usefulness of the HHS by investigating its content validity. METHODS: We performed a systematic review based on a literature search in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for descriptive studies published in 2007. 54 studies (59 patient groups) met our criteria and were included in the data analysis. To determine the content validity, we calculated the ceiling effect (percentage) for each separate study and we pooled data to measure the weighted mean. A subanalysis of indications for THA was performed to differentiate the populations for which the HHS would be suitable and for which it would not. A ceiling effect of 15% or less was considered to be acceptable. RESULTS: Over half the studies (31/59) revealed unacceptable ceiling effects. Pooled data across the studies included (n = 6,667 patients) suggested ceiling effects of 20% (95%CI: 18–22). Ceiling effects were greater (32%, 95%CI:12–52) in those patients undergoing hip resurfacing arthroplasty. INTERPRETATION: Although the Harris hip score is widely used in arthroplasty research on outcomes, ceiling effects are common and these severely limit its validity in this field of research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3216080
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Informa Healthcare
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32160802011-11-25 The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?: A systematic review Wamper, Kim E Sierevelt, Inger N Poolman, Rudolf W Bhandari, Mohit Haverkamp, Daniël Acta Orthop Article BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The Harris hip score (HHS), a disease-specific health status scale that is frequently used to measure the outcome of total hip arthroplasty, has never been validated properly. A questionnaire is suitable only when all 5 psychometric properties are of sufficient quality. We questioned the usefulness of the HHS by investigating its content validity. METHODS: We performed a systematic review based on a literature search in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for descriptive studies published in 2007. 54 studies (59 patient groups) met our criteria and were included in the data analysis. To determine the content validity, we calculated the ceiling effect (percentage) for each separate study and we pooled data to measure the weighted mean. A subanalysis of indications for THA was performed to differentiate the populations for which the HHS would be suitable and for which it would not. A ceiling effect of 15% or less was considered to be acceptable. RESULTS: Over half the studies (31/59) revealed unacceptable ceiling effects. Pooled data across the studies included (n = 6,667 patients) suggested ceiling effects of 20% (95%CI: 18–22). Ceiling effects were greater (32%, 95%CI:12–52) in those patients undergoing hip resurfacing arthroplasty. INTERPRETATION: Although the Harris hip score is widely used in arthroplasty research on outcomes, ceiling effects are common and these severely limit its validity in this field of research. Informa Healthcare 2010-12 2010-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC3216080/ /pubmed/21110703 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2010.537808 Text en Copyright: © Nordic Orthopaedic Federation http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the source is credited.
spellingShingle Article
Wamper, Kim E
Sierevelt, Inger N
Poolman, Rudolf W
Bhandari, Mohit
Haverkamp, Daniël
The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?: A systematic review
title The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?: A systematic review
title_full The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?: A systematic review
title_fullStr The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?: A systematic review
title_short The Harris hip score: Do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?: A systematic review
title_sort harris hip score: do ceiling effects limit its usefulness in orthopedics?: a systematic review
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3216080/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21110703
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2010.537808
work_keys_str_mv AT wamperkime theharrishipscoredoceilingeffectslimititsusefulnessinorthopedicsasystematicreview
AT siereveltingern theharrishipscoredoceilingeffectslimititsusefulnessinorthopedicsasystematicreview
AT poolmanrudolfw theharrishipscoredoceilingeffectslimititsusefulnessinorthopedicsasystematicreview
AT bhandarimohit theharrishipscoredoceilingeffectslimititsusefulnessinorthopedicsasystematicreview
AT haverkampdaniel theharrishipscoredoceilingeffectslimititsusefulnessinorthopedicsasystematicreview
AT wamperkime harrishipscoredoceilingeffectslimititsusefulnessinorthopedicsasystematicreview
AT siereveltingern harrishipscoredoceilingeffectslimititsusefulnessinorthopedicsasystematicreview
AT poolmanrudolfw harrishipscoredoceilingeffectslimititsusefulnessinorthopedicsasystematicreview
AT bhandarimohit harrishipscoredoceilingeffectslimititsusefulnessinorthopedicsasystematicreview
AT haverkampdaniel harrishipscoredoceilingeffectslimititsusefulnessinorthopedicsasystematicreview