484
Views
2
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Assessment Procedures

The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis, Lequesne Algofunctional index, Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale-short form, and Visual Analogue Scale in patients with knee osteoarthritis: responsiveness and minimal clinically important differences

ORCID Icon, , ORCID Icon, , ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 2185-2191 | Received 12 Sep 2021, Accepted 28 May 2022, Published online: 11 Jun 2022

References

  • Brouwer RW, Huizinga MR, Duivenvoorden T, et al. Osteotomy for treating knee osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(12):CD004019.
  • Mehdinasab S, Haddadpoor A, Sarrafan N, et al. Prevalence and evaluation of risk factors in primary knee osteoarthritis. Sci Med J. 2010;9(2):135–141.
  • Salaffi F, Piva S, Barreca C, et al. Validation of an Italian version of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2 (ITALIAN-AIMS2) for patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Gonarthrosis and Quality of Life Assessment (GOQOLA) Study Group. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2000;39(7):720–727.
  • Tüzün E, Eker L, Aytar A, et al. Acceptability, reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Turkish version of WOMAC osteoarthritis index. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2005;13(1):28–33.
  • Escobar A, Quintana J, Bilbao A, et al. Validation of the Spanish version of the WOMAC questionnaire for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Clin Rheumatol. 2002;21(6):466–471.
  • Ganesh S, Mohanty P, Das SP, et al. Multidisciplinary management of knee osteoarthritis using the international classification of functioning, disability and health. DCID. 2016;26(4):155–169.
  • Kiadaliri AA, Lohmander LS, Moradi-Lakeh M, et al. High and rising burden of hip and knee osteoarthritis in the Nordic region, 1990–2015: findings from the global burden of disease study 2015. Acta Orthop. 2018;89(2):177–183.
  • Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, et al. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988;15(12):1833–1840.
  • Lequesne M, editor. Indices of severity and disease activity for osteoarthritis. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 1991;20:48–54.
  • Guillemin F, Coste J, Pouchot J, et al. The AIMS2‐SF. A short form of the arthritis impact measurement scales 2. Arthritis Rheum. 1997;40(7):1267–1274.
  • Askary-Ashtiani AR, Javad Mousavi S, Montazeri A, et al. Cultural adaptation and validation of the Persian version of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2-Short Form in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Disabil Rehabil. 2009;31(25):2081–2087.
  • Nadrian H, Moghimi N, Nadrian E, et al. Validity and reliability of the Persian versions of WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index and Lequesne Algofunctional Index. Clin Rheumatol. 2012;31(7):1097–1102.
  • Rosemann T, Korner T, Wensing M, et al. Evaluation and cultural adaptation of a German version of the AIMS2-SF questionnaire (German AIMS2-SF). Rheumatology (Oxford). 2005;44(9):1190–1195.
  • Askary-Ashtiani AR, Mousavi SJ, Parnianpour M, et al. Translation and validation of the Persian version of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2-Short Form (AIMS2-SF) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Clin Rheumatol. 2009;28(5):521–527.
  • Cleland JA, Whitman JM, Houser JL, et al. Psychometric properties of selected tests in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine J. 2012;12(10):921–931.
  • Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, et al. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(5):459–468.
  • Stratford PW, Binkley JM, Riddle DL. Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. Phys Ther. 1996;76(10):1109–1123.
  • Zelle BA, Herzka AS, Harner CD, et al. Evaluation of clinical outcomes in anterior cruciate ligament surgery. Oper Tech Orthop. 2005;15(1):76–84.
  • Ebrahimzadeh MH, Makhmalbaf H, Birjandinejad A, et al. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) in persian speaking patients with knee osteoarthritis. Archiv Bone Joint Surg. 2014;2(1):57.
  • McClinton SM, Cobian DG, Heiderscheit BC. Physical therapist management of anterior knee pain. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2020;13(6):776–787.
  • Faucher M, Poiraudeau S, Lefevre-Colau M, et al. Algo-functional assessment of knee osteoarthritis: comparison of the test-retest reliability and construct validity of the WOMAC and Lequesne indexes. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2002;10(8):602–610.
  • Xie F, Thumboo J, Lo N-N, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Singapore English and Chinese versions of the Lequesne Algofunctional Index of knee in Asians with knee osteoarthritis in Singapore. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2007;15(1):19–26.
  • Avery VR. Comparing the visual analog scale and verbally administered numeric rating scale in traumatic versus non-traumatic pain in a community hospital emergency center [master's thesis]. University of Toledo; 2010.
  • Greco NJ, Anderson AF, Mann BJ, et al. Responsiveness of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form in comparison to the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, modified Cincinnati Knee Rating System, and Short Form 36 in patients with focal articular cartilage defects. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(5):891–902.
  • Deyo RA, Centor RM. Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis. 1986;39(11):897–906.
  • Lehman LA, Velozo CA. Ability to detect change in patient function: responsiveness designs and methods of calculation. J Hand Ther. 2010;23(4):361–371.
  • Theiler R, Sangha O, Schaeren S, et al. Superior responsiveness of the pain and function sections of the Western Ontario and McMaster universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) as compared to the Lequesne-Algofunctional index in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1999;7(6):515–519.
  • Taal E, Rasker JJ, Riemsma R. Sensitivity to change of AIMS2 and AIMS2-SF components in comparison to M-HAQ and VAS-pain. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(12):1655–1658.
  • Kamper SJ, Maher CG, Mackay G. Global rating of change scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and considerations for design. J Man Manip Ther. 2009;17(3):163–170.
  • Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G. Smallest detectable and minimal clinically important differences of rehabilitation intervention with their implications for required sample sizes using WOMAC and SF‐36 quality of life measurement instruments in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Arthritis Care Res. 2001;45(4):384–391.
  • Halme AS, Fritel X, Benedetti A, et al. Implications of the minimal clinically important difference for health-related quality-of-life outcomes: a comparison of sample size requirements for an incontinence treatment trial. Value Health. 2015;18(2):292–298.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.