Cargando…

Validation of the Mayo Hip Score: construct validity, reliability and responsiveness to change

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have provided the initial evidence for construct validity and test-retest reliability of the Mayo Hip Score. Instruments used for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) outcomes assessment should be valid, reliable and responsive to change. Our main objective was to examine the re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Singh, Jasvinder A., Schleck, Cathy, Harmsen, W. Scott, Lewallen, David G.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4719668/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26785640
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-0868-3
_version_ 1782410957728776192
author Singh, Jasvinder A.
Schleck, Cathy
Harmsen, W. Scott
Lewallen, David G.
author_facet Singh, Jasvinder A.
Schleck, Cathy
Harmsen, W. Scott
Lewallen, David G.
author_sort Singh, Jasvinder A.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Previous studies have provided the initial evidence for construct validity and test-retest reliability of the Mayo Hip Score. Instruments used for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) outcomes assessment should be valid, reliable and responsive to change. Our main objective was to examine the responsiveness to change, association with subsequent revision and the construct validity of the Mayo hip score. METHODS: Discriminant ability was assessed by calculating effect size (ES), standardized response mean (SRM) and Guyatt’s responsiveness index (GRI). Minimal clinically important difference (MCII) and moderate improvement thresholds were calculated. We assessed construct validity by examining association of scores with preoperative patient characteristics and correlation with Harris hip score, and assessed association of scores with the risk of subsequent revision. RESULTS: Five thousand three hundred seven provided baseline data; of those with baseline data, 2,278 and 2,089 (39 %) provided 2- and 5-year data, respectively. Large ES, SRM and GRI ranging 2.66–2.78, 2.42–2.61 and 1.67–1.88 were noted for Mayo hip scores with THA, respectively. The MCII and moderate improvement thresholds were 22.4–22.7 and 39.4–40.5 respectively. Hazard ratios of revision surgery were higher with lower final score or less improvement in Mayo hip score at 2-years and borderline significant/non-significant at 5-years, respectively: (1) score ≤55 with hazard ratios of 2.24 (95 % CI, 1.45, 3.46; p = 0.0003) and 1.70 (95 % CI, 1.00, 2.92; p = 0.05) of implant revision subsequently, compared to 72-80 points; (2) no improvement or worsening score with hazard ratios 3.94 (95 % CI, 1.50, 10.30; p = 0.005) and 2.72 (95 % CI, 0.85,8.70; p = 0.09), compared to improvement >50-points. Mayo hip score had significant positive correlation with younger age, male gender, lower BMI, lower ASA class and lower Deyo-Charlson index (p ≤ 0.003 for each) and with Harris hip scores (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mayo Hip Score is valid, sensitive to change and associated with future risk of revision surgery in patients with primary THA. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-016-0868-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4719668
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47196682016-01-21 Validation of the Mayo Hip Score: construct validity, reliability and responsiveness to change Singh, Jasvinder A. Schleck, Cathy Harmsen, W. Scott Lewallen, David G. BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Previous studies have provided the initial evidence for construct validity and test-retest reliability of the Mayo Hip Score. Instruments used for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) outcomes assessment should be valid, reliable and responsive to change. Our main objective was to examine the responsiveness to change, association with subsequent revision and the construct validity of the Mayo hip score. METHODS: Discriminant ability was assessed by calculating effect size (ES), standardized response mean (SRM) and Guyatt’s responsiveness index (GRI). Minimal clinically important difference (MCII) and moderate improvement thresholds were calculated. We assessed construct validity by examining association of scores with preoperative patient characteristics and correlation with Harris hip score, and assessed association of scores with the risk of subsequent revision. RESULTS: Five thousand three hundred seven provided baseline data; of those with baseline data, 2,278 and 2,089 (39 %) provided 2- and 5-year data, respectively. Large ES, SRM and GRI ranging 2.66–2.78, 2.42–2.61 and 1.67–1.88 were noted for Mayo hip scores with THA, respectively. The MCII and moderate improvement thresholds were 22.4–22.7 and 39.4–40.5 respectively. Hazard ratios of revision surgery were higher with lower final score or less improvement in Mayo hip score at 2-years and borderline significant/non-significant at 5-years, respectively: (1) score ≤55 with hazard ratios of 2.24 (95 % CI, 1.45, 3.46; p = 0.0003) and 1.70 (95 % CI, 1.00, 2.92; p = 0.05) of implant revision subsequently, compared to 72-80 points; (2) no improvement or worsening score with hazard ratios 3.94 (95 % CI, 1.50, 10.30; p = 0.005) and 2.72 (95 % CI, 0.85,8.70; p = 0.09), compared to improvement >50-points. Mayo hip score had significant positive correlation with younger age, male gender, lower BMI, lower ASA class and lower Deyo-Charlson index (p ≤ 0.003 for each) and with Harris hip scores (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Mayo Hip Score is valid, sensitive to change and associated with future risk of revision surgery in patients with primary THA. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-016-0868-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4719668/ /pubmed/26785640 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-0868-3 Text en © Singh et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Singh, Jasvinder A.
Schleck, Cathy
Harmsen, W. Scott
Lewallen, David G.
Validation of the Mayo Hip Score: construct validity, reliability and responsiveness to change
title Validation of the Mayo Hip Score: construct validity, reliability and responsiveness to change
title_full Validation of the Mayo Hip Score: construct validity, reliability and responsiveness to change
title_fullStr Validation of the Mayo Hip Score: construct validity, reliability and responsiveness to change
title_full_unstemmed Validation of the Mayo Hip Score: construct validity, reliability and responsiveness to change
title_short Validation of the Mayo Hip Score: construct validity, reliability and responsiveness to change
title_sort validation of the mayo hip score: construct validity, reliability and responsiveness to change
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4719668/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26785640
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-0868-3
work_keys_str_mv AT singhjasvindera validationofthemayohipscoreconstructvalidityreliabilityandresponsivenesstochange
AT schleckcathy validationofthemayohipscoreconstructvalidityreliabilityandresponsivenesstochange
AT harmsenwscott validationofthemayohipscoreconstructvalidityreliabilityandresponsivenesstochange
AT lewallendavidg validationofthemayohipscoreconstructvalidityreliabilityandresponsivenesstochange