Cargando…
Floor and ceiling effects in the OHS: an analysis of the NHS PROMs data set
OBJECTIVES: The objective was to examine whether the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) demonstrated a floor or a ceiling effect when used to measure the outcome of hip replacement surgery in a large national cohort. SETTING: Secondary database analysis of a national audit conducted in England and Wales on pati...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4521553/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26216152 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007765 |
_version_ | 1782383829193850880 |
---|---|
author | Lim, Christopher R Harris, Kristina Dawson, Jill Beard, David J Fitzpatrick, Ray Price, Andrew J |
author_facet | Lim, Christopher R Harris, Kristina Dawson, Jill Beard, David J Fitzpatrick, Ray Price, Andrew J |
author_sort | Lim, Christopher R |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: The objective was to examine whether the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) demonstrated a floor or a ceiling effect when used to measure the outcome of hip replacement surgery in a large national cohort. SETTING: Secondary database analysis of a national audit conducted in England and Wales on patient undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty in a secondary care setting. PARTICIPANTS: 93 253 primary arthroplasty patients completed preoperative OHS questionnaires and 69 361 completed 6-month postoperative OHS questionnaires. The population had a mean age of 67.78 (range 14–100, SD 11.3) and 59% were female. PRIMARY SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Secondary outcome measures were the OHS-FCS and OHS-PCS. Floor and ceiling effects were considered present if >15% of patients achieved the worst score/floor effect (0/48) or best/ceiling effect (48/48) score. RESULTS: Preoperatively, 0% of patients achieved the best score (48) and 0.1% achieved the worst score (0). Postoperatively, 0.1% patients achieved the worst score, but the percentage achieving the best score increased to 11.6%. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that patients between 50 and 59 years of age had the highest postoperative best score, at 15.3%. The highest postoperative OHS worst score percentage was in a group of patients who had a preoperative OHS above 41/48 at 28%. Furthermore, 22.6% of patients achieved the best postoperative OHS-PCS and 19.9% best postoperative OHS-FCS. CONCLUSIONS: Based on NHS PROMS data the overall OHS does not exhibit a ceiling or floor effect and should continue to be used as a valid measure of patient-reported outcomes for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. However, subscale analysis does indicate some limitations in the OHS-PCS and OHS-FCS. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NDORMS. Introducing standardised and evidence-based thresholds for hip and knee replacement surgery. The Arthroplasty Candidacy Help Engine (ACHE tool). HTA Project 11/63/01. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4521553 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45215532015-08-05 Floor and ceiling effects in the OHS: an analysis of the NHS PROMs data set Lim, Christopher R Harris, Kristina Dawson, Jill Beard, David J Fitzpatrick, Ray Price, Andrew J BMJ Open Surgery OBJECTIVES: The objective was to examine whether the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) demonstrated a floor or a ceiling effect when used to measure the outcome of hip replacement surgery in a large national cohort. SETTING: Secondary database analysis of a national audit conducted in England and Wales on patient undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty in a secondary care setting. PARTICIPANTS: 93 253 primary arthroplasty patients completed preoperative OHS questionnaires and 69 361 completed 6-month postoperative OHS questionnaires. The population had a mean age of 67.78 (range 14–100, SD 11.3) and 59% were female. PRIMARY SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measure was the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Secondary outcome measures were the OHS-FCS and OHS-PCS. Floor and ceiling effects were considered present if >15% of patients achieved the worst score/floor effect (0/48) or best/ceiling effect (48/48) score. RESULTS: Preoperatively, 0% of patients achieved the best score (48) and 0.1% achieved the worst score (0). Postoperatively, 0.1% patients achieved the worst score, but the percentage achieving the best score increased to 11.6%. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that patients between 50 and 59 years of age had the highest postoperative best score, at 15.3%. The highest postoperative OHS worst score percentage was in a group of patients who had a preoperative OHS above 41/48 at 28%. Furthermore, 22.6% of patients achieved the best postoperative OHS-PCS and 19.9% best postoperative OHS-FCS. CONCLUSIONS: Based on NHS PROMS data the overall OHS does not exhibit a ceiling or floor effect and should continue to be used as a valid measure of patient-reported outcomes for patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. However, subscale analysis does indicate some limitations in the OHS-PCS and OHS-FCS. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NDORMS. Introducing standardised and evidence-based thresholds for hip and knee replacement surgery. The Arthroplasty Candidacy Help Engine (ACHE tool). HTA Project 11/63/01. BMJ Publishing Group 2015-07-27 /pmc/articles/PMC4521553/ /pubmed/26216152 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007765 Text en Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Surgery Lim, Christopher R Harris, Kristina Dawson, Jill Beard, David J Fitzpatrick, Ray Price, Andrew J Floor and ceiling effects in the OHS: an analysis of the NHS PROMs data set |
title | Floor and ceiling effects in the OHS: an analysis of the NHS PROMs data set |
title_full | Floor and ceiling effects in the OHS: an analysis of the NHS PROMs data set |
title_fullStr | Floor and ceiling effects in the OHS: an analysis of the NHS PROMs data set |
title_full_unstemmed | Floor and ceiling effects in the OHS: an analysis of the NHS PROMs data set |
title_short | Floor and ceiling effects in the OHS: an analysis of the NHS PROMs data set |
title_sort | floor and ceiling effects in the ohs: an analysis of the nhs proms data set |
topic | Surgery |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4521553/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26216152 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007765 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT limchristopherr floorandceilingeffectsintheohsananalysisofthenhspromsdataset AT harriskristina floorandceilingeffectsintheohsananalysisofthenhspromsdataset AT dawsonjill floorandceilingeffectsintheohsananalysisofthenhspromsdataset AT bearddavidj floorandceilingeffectsintheohsananalysisofthenhspromsdataset AT fitzpatrickray floorandceilingeffectsintheohsananalysisofthenhspromsdataset AT priceandrewj floorandceilingeffectsintheohsananalysisofthenhspromsdataset |