Cargando…

Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement

Background and purpose — Interpreting changes in Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) following total knee replacement (TKR) is challenged by the lack of methodologically rigorous methods to estimate minimal important change (MIC) values. We determined MIC values by predictive mod...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ingelsrud, Lina H, Roos, Ewa M, Terluin, Berend, Gromov, Kirill, Husted, Henrik, Troelsen, Anders
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Taylor & Francis 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6202761/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29860936
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1480739
_version_ 1783365747502743552
author Ingelsrud, Lina H
Roos, Ewa M
Terluin, Berend
Gromov, Kirill
Husted, Henrik
Troelsen, Anders
author_facet Ingelsrud, Lina H
Roos, Ewa M
Terluin, Berend
Gromov, Kirill
Husted, Henrik
Troelsen, Anders
author_sort Ingelsrud, Lina H
collection PubMed
description Background and purpose — Interpreting changes in Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) following total knee replacement (TKR) is challenged by the lack of methodologically rigorous methods to estimate minimal important change (MIC) values. We determined MIC values by predictive modeling for the OKS and FJS in patients undergoing primary TKR. Patients and methods — We conducted a prospective cohort study in patients undergoing TKR between January 2015 and July 2016. OKS and FJS were completed preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively, accompanied by a 7-point anchor question ranging from “better, an important improvement” to “worse, an important worsening.” MIC improvement values were defined with the predictive modeling approach based on logistic regression, with patients’ decisions on important improvement as dependent variable and change in OKS/FJS as independent variable. Furthermore, the MICs were adjusted for high proportions of improved patients. Results — 333/496 (67.1%) patients with a median age of 69 years (61% female) had complete data for OKS, FJS, and anchor questions at 1 year postoperatively. 85% were importantly improved. Spearman’s correlations between the anchor and the change score were 0.56 for OKS, and 0.61 for FJS. Adjusted predictive MIC values (95% CI) for improvement were 8 (6–9) for OKS and 14 (10–18) for FJS. Interpretation — The MIC value of 8 for OKS and 14 for FJS corresponds to minimal improvements that the average patient finds important and aids in our understanding of whether improvements after TKR are clinically relevant.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6202761
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Taylor & Francis
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62027612018-10-29 Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement Ingelsrud, Lina H Roos, Ewa M Terluin, Berend Gromov, Kirill Husted, Henrik Troelsen, Anders Acta Orthop Article Background and purpose — Interpreting changes in Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) following total knee replacement (TKR) is challenged by the lack of methodologically rigorous methods to estimate minimal important change (MIC) values. We determined MIC values by predictive modeling for the OKS and FJS in patients undergoing primary TKR. Patients and methods — We conducted a prospective cohort study in patients undergoing TKR between January 2015 and July 2016. OKS and FJS were completed preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively, accompanied by a 7-point anchor question ranging from “better, an important improvement” to “worse, an important worsening.” MIC improvement values were defined with the predictive modeling approach based on logistic regression, with patients’ decisions on important improvement as dependent variable and change in OKS/FJS as independent variable. Furthermore, the MICs were adjusted for high proportions of improved patients. Results — 333/496 (67.1%) patients with a median age of 69 years (61% female) had complete data for OKS, FJS, and anchor questions at 1 year postoperatively. 85% were importantly improved. Spearman’s correlations between the anchor and the change score were 0.56 for OKS, and 0.61 for FJS. Adjusted predictive MIC values (95% CI) for improvement were 8 (6–9) for OKS and 14 (10–18) for FJS. Interpretation — The MIC value of 8 for OKS and 14 for FJS corresponds to minimal improvements that the average patient finds important and aids in our understanding of whether improvements after TKR are clinically relevant. Taylor & Francis 2018-10 2018-06-04 /pmc/articles/PMC6202761/ /pubmed/29860936 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1480739 Text en © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Taylor & Francis on behalf of the Nordic Orthopedic Federation. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
spellingShingle Article
Ingelsrud, Lina H
Roos, Ewa M
Terluin, Berend
Gromov, Kirill
Husted, Henrik
Troelsen, Anders
Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement
title Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement
title_full Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement
title_fullStr Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement
title_full_unstemmed Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement
title_short Minimal important change values for the Oxford Knee Score and the Forgotten Joint Score at 1 year after total knee replacement
title_sort minimal important change values for the oxford knee score and the forgotten joint score at 1 year after total knee replacement
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6202761/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29860936
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2018.1480739
work_keys_str_mv AT ingelsrudlinah minimalimportantchangevaluesfortheoxfordkneescoreandtheforgottenjointscoreat1yearaftertotalkneereplacement
AT roosewam minimalimportantchangevaluesfortheoxfordkneescoreandtheforgottenjointscoreat1yearaftertotalkneereplacement
AT terluinberend minimalimportantchangevaluesfortheoxfordkneescoreandtheforgottenjointscoreat1yearaftertotalkneereplacement
AT gromovkirill minimalimportantchangevaluesfortheoxfordkneescoreandtheforgottenjointscoreat1yearaftertotalkneereplacement
AT hustedhenrik minimalimportantchangevaluesfortheoxfordkneescoreandtheforgottenjointscoreat1yearaftertotalkneereplacement
AT troelsenanders minimalimportantchangevaluesfortheoxfordkneescoreandtheforgottenjointscoreat1yearaftertotalkneereplacement