The problem with measuring patient perceptions of outcome with existing outcome measures in foot and ankle surgery

被引:50
|
作者
Parker, J
Nester, CJ
Long, AF
Barrie, J
机构
[1] Univ Salford, Ctr Rehabil & Human Performance Res, Salford M6 6PU, Lancs, England
[2] Univ Salford, Hlth Care Practice R&D Unit, Salford M6 6PU, Lancs, England
[3] Blackburn Royal Infirm, Dept Orthopaed, Blackburn, Lancs, England
关键词
patient perceptions; outcome measurement; surgery; validity; reliability; responsiveness;
D O I
10.1177/107110070302400109
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Quality outcome measures are the cornerstone of clinical research. A review of outcome measures used in foot and ankle surgery research reveals that the issues of validity, reliability and responsiveness of outcome measures have not been addressed. Most reports in the literature have attempted to evaluate patient perceptions of outcome following foot surgery. Underlying the many difficulties with these outcome measures is a lack of understanding of what patients perceive to be important in terms of outcome. Consequently none of the existing outcome measures can claim to be valid measures of patient perceptions of outcome, as there has been no research uncovering these perceptions. In addition, measures of general health status and quality of life in relation to outcome of foot and ankle surgery have been largely ignored to date.
引用
收藏
页码:56 / 60
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] A systematic review of measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures for use in patients with foot or ankle diseases
    Yuanxi Jia
    Hsiaomin Huang
    Joel J. Gagnier
    Quality of Life Research, 2017, 26 : 1969 - 2010
  • [22] A systematic review of measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures for use in patients with foot or ankle diseases
    Jia, Yuanxi
    Huang, Hsiaomin
    Gagnier, Joel J.
    QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2017, 26 (08) : 1969 - 2010
  • [23] A Comparison of the Readability of Two Patient-reported Outcome Measures Used to Evaluate Foot Surgery
    Alvey, James
    Palmer, Simon
    Otter, Simon
    JOURNAL OF FOOT & ANKLE SURGERY, 2012, 51 (04): : 412 - 414
  • [24] Validity of five foot and ankle specific electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) instruments in patients undergoing elective orthopedic foot or ankle surgery
    Uimonen, Mikko M.
    Ponkilainen, Ville T.
    Toom, Alar
    Miettinen, Mikko
    Hakkinen, Arja H.
    Sandelin, Henrik
    Latvala, Antti O.
    Sirola, Timo
    Sampo, Mika
    Roine, Risto P.
    Lindahl, Jan
    Ilves, Outi
    Sandbacka, Anna
    Repo, Jussi P.
    FOOT AND ANKLE SURGERY, 2021, 27 (01) : 52 - 59
  • [25] Validating the Foot and Ankle Outcome score for measuring foot dysfunction among hallux valgus surgery patients using item response theory
    Yusuf, Fardowsa
    Liu, Guiping
    Wing, Kevin
    Crump, Trafford
    Penner, Murray
    Younger, Alastair
    Veljkovic, Andrea
    Sutherland, Jason M.
    FOOT AND ANKLE SURGERY, 2020, 26 (08) : 864 - 870
  • [26] Measuring Orthopaedic Outcome: Shoulder Outcome Measures
    Lubowitz, James H.
    Provencher, Matthew T.
    Poehling, Gary G.
    ARTHROSCOPY-THE JOURNAL OF ARTHROSCOPIC AND RELATED SURGERY, 2013, 29 (05): : 791 - 793
  • [27] Role of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures on Predicting Outcome of Bunion Surgery
    MacDonald, Ashlee
    Houck, Jeff
    Baumhauer, Judith F.
    FOOT & ANKLE INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 41 (02) : 133 - 139
  • [28] Patient-reported outcome measures in vascular surgery
    Hicks, Caitlin W.
    Lum, Ying Wei
    SEMINARS IN VASCULAR SURGERY, 2015, 28 (02) : 122 - 133
  • [29] Patient-reported Outcome Measures in Spine Surgery
    McCormick, John D.
    Werner, Brian C.
    Shimer, Adam L.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS, 2013, 21 (02) : 99 - 107
  • [30] Patient reported outcome measures in male incontinence surgery
    Tran, M. G. B.
    Yip, J.
    Uveili, K.
    Biers, S. M.
    Thiruchelvam, N.
    ANNALS OF THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS OF ENGLAND, 2014, 96 (07) : 521 - 525