Use of questionnaire-based outcomes for the measurement of activities and participation in the physiotherapy management of hip osteoarthritis: a review

REFERENCE

• Martel-Pelletier J. Pathophysiology of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1999;7:371–3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Felson DT. Epidemiology of hip and knee osteoarthritis. Epidemiol Rev 1988;10:1–28
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tepper S, Hochberg MC. Factors associated with hip osteoarthritis: data from the first National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES-I). Am J Epidemiol 1993;137:1081–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingvarsson T, Hogglund G, Lahmander LS. Prevalence of hip osteoarthritis in Iceland. Ann Rheum Dis 1999;58:201–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Croft P, Lewis M, Wyn Jones C, Coggan D, Cooper C. Health status in patients awaiting hip replacement for osteoarthritis. Rheumatology 2002;41:1001–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahon JL, Bourne RB, Feeny CH, David H, Stitt L, Webster- Bogaert S. Health-related quality of life and mobility of patients awaiting elective total hip arthroplasty: a prospective study. Can Med Assoc J 2002;167:1115–21
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Picavet HS, Hoeymans N. Health related quality of life in multiple musculoskeletal diseases: SF-36 and EQ-5D in the DMC3 study. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:723–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salaffi F, Carotti M, Grassi W. Health-related quality of life in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis: comparison of generic and disease-specific instruments. Clin Rheumatol 2005;24:29–37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liebenson C. Yeomans S. Outcome assessment in musculoskeletal medicine. Man Ther 1997;2:67–74
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Haigh R, Tennant A, Biering-Sorenson F, Grimby G, Marincek, Phillips S, et al. The use of outcome measures in physical medicine and rehabilitation across Europe. J Rehabil Med 2001;33:273–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kay TM, Myers AM, Huijbregts MPJ. How far have we come since 1992? A comparative study of physiotherapists’ use of outcome measures. Physiother Can 2001;Fall:268–75
   Google Scholar
• Jette AM, Smith K, Haley SM, Davis KD. Physical therapy episodes of care for patients with low back pain. Phys Ther 1994;74:101–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vanderkooy J, Bach B, Gross A. A clinical effort towards maximizing evidence based practice. Physiother Can 1999;51:273–9
   Google Scholar
• Huijbregts MJP, Myers AM, Kay TM, Gavin TS. Systematic outcome assessment in clinical practice: challenges experienced by physiotherapists. Physiother Can 2002;Winter:25–31
   Google Scholar
• Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR. Evaluating patient- based outcome measures for use in clinical trials: a review. Health Tech Assess 1998;2:1–74 <http://www.hta.nhsweb.nhs.uk> (Accessed 6/2/06)
   Google Scholar
• Garratt A, Schmidt L, Mackintosh A, Fitzpatrick R. Quality of life measurements: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures. BMJ 2002;324:1417–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abrams D, Davidson M, Harrick J, Harcourt P, Zylinski M, Clancy J. Monitoring the change: current trends in outcome measure usage in physiotherapy. Man Ther 2006;11:46–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veenhof C, Bijlsma JWJ, van der Ende CHM, van Dijk GM, Pisters MF, Dekker J. Psychometric evaluation of osteoarthritis questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Arthritis Care Res 2005;55:480–92
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Congress of Physical Therapy (WCPT). European Core Standards of Physiotherapy Practice, European Region of the World Confederation of Physiotherapy Practice 2002 <http://www.physio-europe.org > (accessed 17/9/06)
   Google Scholar
• Garratt AM, Klaber-Moffett J, Farrin AJ. Responsiveness of generic and specific measures of health outcome in low back pain. Spine 2001;26:71–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization (WHO). International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Geneva: WHO, 2001 <http://www3.who.icf> (accessed 7/2/06)
   Google Scholar
• Stucki G, Ewert T. How to assess the impact of arthritis on the individual patient: the WHO ICF. Ann Rheum Dis 2005;64:664–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization (WHO). International classification of impairments, disabilities and handicaps: a manual of classification relating to the consequences of disease. Geneva: WHO, 1980
   Google Scholar
• Stucki G, Ewert T, Ciezo A. Value and application of the ICF in rehabilitation medicine. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:932–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swinkels RAHM, Oostendorp RAB, Bouter LM. Which are the best instruments for measuring disabilities in gait and gait- related activities in patients with rheumatic diseases? Clin Exp Rheumatol 2004;22:25–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellamy N, Kirwan J, Boers M, Brooks P, Strand V, Tugwell P, et al. Recommendations for a core set of outcome measures for future phase III clinical trials in knee, hip and hand osteoarthritis. Consensus development at OMERACT III. J Rheumatol 1997;24:799–802
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pham T, van der Heijde D, Altman RD, Anderson JJ, Bellamy N, Hochberg M, et al. OMERACT-OARSI initiative: Osteoarthritis Research Society International set of responder criteria for osteoarthritis clinical trials revisited. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2004;12:389–99
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roland M, Torgenson D. Understanding controlled trials - What outcomes should be measured? BMJ 1998;317:1075
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pollard B, Johnston M, Dieppe P. What do osteoarthritis health outcome instruments measure? Impairment, activity limitation or participation restriction? J Rheumatol 2006;33,757–63
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDowell I, Newell C. Measuring health, a guide to rating scales and questionnaires, 2nd edn. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996
   Google Scholar
• Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health Measurement Scales, a practical guide to their development and use, 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford Medical, 2003
   Google Scholar
• Finch E, Brooks D, Stratford PW, Mayo NE. Physical Rehabilitation Outcome Measures: a guide to enhanced clinical decision making, 2nd edn. Canadian Physiotherapy Association. Toronto: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2002
   Google Scholar
• Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt L. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient-relevant outcomes following total hip or knee arthroplasty in osteoarthritis. J Orthop Rheumatol 1988;1:95–108
   Google Scholar
• Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1988;15:1833–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin D, Engelberg R, Agel J, Siotkowski MF. Comparison of the Musculoskeletal Function Assessment Questionnaire with the Short Form-36, and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and the Sickness Impact Profile Health Status Measures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1997;79:1323–35
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin YC, Davey RC, Cochrane T. Tests for physical function of the elderly with hip and knee osteoarthritis. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2001;11:280–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell R, Quilty B, Dieppe P. Discrepancies between patients’ assessments of outcome: qualitative study nested within a randomized controlled trial. BMJ 2005;326:252–3
   Google Scholar
• Faucher M, Poriaudeau S, Lefevre-Colau MM, Rannou F, Fermanian J, Revel M. Algo-functional assessment of knee osteoarthritis: comparison of the test-retest reliability and construct validity of the WOMAC and Lequense indexes. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2002;10:602–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davey RC, Edwards SM, Cochrane T. Test-retest reliability of lower extremity functional and self report measures in elderly with osteoarthritis, Adv Physiother 2003;5:155–60
   Google Scholar
• McConnell S, Kolopack P, Davies AM. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC): review of its utility and measurements properties. Arthritis Care Res 2001;45:453–61
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stucki G, Sangha O, Stucki S, Micheal BA, Tyndall A, Dick W, et al. Comparison of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index and a self-report format of the self administered Lequense- Algofunctional Index in patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1998;6:79–86
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright B, Young M. A comparison of different indices of responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol 1997;50:239–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellamy N, Campbell J, Hill J, Band P. A comparative study of telephone versus onsite completion of the WOMAC 3.0 Osteoarthritis Index. J Rheumatol 2002;29:783–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier JE, Harper R, Munro J, Walters SJ, Snaith ML. Generic and condition-specific outcome measures for people with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology 1999;38:870–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Theiler R, Sangha O, Schaeren S, Micheal BA, Tyndall A, Disck W, et al. Superior responsiveness of the pain and functional sections of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) as compared with the Lequense-Algofunctional index in patients with osteoarthritis of the lower extremities. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1999;7:515–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davies GM, Watson DJ, Bellamy N. Comparison of the responsiveness and relative effect size of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and the Short-Form Medical Outcomes study survey in a randomised controlled trial of osteoarthritis patients. Arthritis Care Res 1999;43:172–9
   Google Scholar
• Quintana JM, Escobar A, Bilbao A, Arostegui I, Lefuente I, et al. Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after hip replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2005;13:1076–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bachemeier CJM, March LM, Cross MJ, Lapsly HM, Tribe KL, Courtenay BG, et al. A comparison of outcomes in osteoarthritis patients undergoing total hip and knee replacement surgery, Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2001;9:137–46
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehrich EW, Davies GM, Watson DJ, Bolognese JA, Seidenberg BC, Bellamy N. Minimal perceptible clinical improvement with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index Questionnaire and global assessments in patients with osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol 2000;27:2635–41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cochrane T, Davey RC, Mattes Edwards SM. Randomised controlled trial of the cost-effectiveness of water based therapy for lower limb osteoarthritis. Health Technol Assess 2005;9:1–29. <http://www.hta.nhsweb.nhs.uk> (Accessed 6/2/06)
   Google Scholar
• Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Steiner W, Stucki G. Responsiveness of the WOMAC index as compared with the SF-36 in patients with osteoarthritis of the legs undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation intervention. Ann Rheum Dis 2001;60:834–40
   Google Scholar
• Lequense MG. The algofunctional indices for hip and knee. J Rheumatol 1997;24:779–81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawson J, Linsell L, Doll A, Zondervan K, Rose P, Carr A, et al. Assessment of the Lequense index of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip in an elderly population. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2005;13:854–60
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dougadas M, Gueguen A, Nguyen M, Berdah L, Lequense M, Mazieres B, et al. Requirement for total hip arthroplasty: an outcome measure of hip osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol 1999;26:855–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun Y, Sturmer T, Gunther KP, Brenner H. Reliability and validity of clinical outcome measurements of osteoarthritis of the hip and knee - a review of the literature. Clin Rheumatol 1997;16:185–98
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meenan RF, Gertman PM, Mason JH. Measuring health status in arthritis: the Arthritis Impact Measurement scales. Arthritis Rheum 1980;23:146–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meenan RF, Mason JH, Anderson JJ, Guccione AA, Kazis LE. AIMS2: the content and properties of a revised and expanded Arthritis Impact Measurement scales health status questionnaire, Arthritis Rheum 1992;35:1–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carr A. Adult measures of quality of life. Arthritis Care Res 2003;49:S113–33
   Google Scholar
• Guillemin F, Coste J, Pouchot J, Ghezail M, Bregeon C, Sany J, the French Quality of Life in Rheumatology group. The AIMS2-SF: a short version of the Arthritis Impact Measurement scales 2. Arthritis Rheum 1997;40:1267–74
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meenan RF, Gertman PM, Mason JH, Dunaif R. The arthritis measurement scales: further investigations of a health status measure. Arthritis Rheum 1982;25:1048–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hakala M, Nieminen P, Mandelius J. Joint impairment is strongly correlated with disability measured by self report questionnaires. Functional status assessment of individuals with rheumatoid arthritis in a population based series. J Rheumatol 1994;21:64–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinberger M, Samsa GP, Hanlon JT, et al. An evaluation of a brief health status measure in elderly veterans. J Am Geriatr Soc 1991;39:691–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soderlin MK, Nieminen P, Hakala M. Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales in a community-based rheumatoid arthritis population. Clin Rheumatol 2000;19:30–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meenan RF. New approaches to outcome assessment; the AIMS questionnaire for arthritis. Adv Intern Med 1986;31:167–85
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ren XS, Kazis L, Meenan RF. Short Form Arthritis Impact Measurement Scale 2: tests of reliability and validity among patients with osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res 1999;12:163–71
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liang MH, Fossel AH, Larson MG. Comparisons of five health status measures for orthopaedic evaluation. Med Care 1990;28:632–42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Boyle CA, McGee H, Hickey A, et al. Individual quality of life in patients undergoing hip replacement. Lancet 1992;339:1088–91
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taal E, Rasker JJ, Riemsma RP. Sensitivity to change of AIMS2 and AIMS2-SF components in comparison to M- HAQ and VAS-pain. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;63:1655–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swinkels RAHM, Bouter LM, Oostendorp RAB, van der Ende CHM. Impairment measures in rheumatic disorders for rehabilitation medicine and allied health care: a systematic review. Rheumatol Int 2005;25:501–12
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swinkels RAHM, Dijkstra PU, Bouter LM. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of instruments to assess disabilities in personal care in patients with rheumatic disorders: a systematic review. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2005;23:71–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers JC, Irrgang JJ. Measures of adult lower extremity function. Arthritis Care Res 2003;49:S67–84
   Google Scholar
• Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. J Rheumatol 1969;23:693–7
   Google Scholar
• Soderman P, Malchau H. Is the Harris Hip Score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? Clin Orthop 2001;384:189–97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soderman P. Malchau H, Herberts P. Outcome of total hip replacement: a comparison of different measurement methods. Clin Orthop 2001;390:163–72
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garellick G, Malchau H, Herberts P. Specific or general outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip replacement: a comparison between the Harris Hip Score and the Nottingham Health Profile. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998;80:600–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hoeksma H, van der Ende CHM, Ronday HK, Heering A, Breedveld FC, Dekker J. Comparison of the responsiveness of the Harris Hip Score with generic measures of hip function in osteoarthritis of the hip. Ann Rheum Dis 2003;62:935–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowling A. Measuring disease, 2nd edn. Buckingham: Open University Press. 2001
   Google Scholar
• Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosonski M, Gandek B. SF-36 Health Survey: manual and interpretation guide. Boston, MA: The Health Institute, New England Medical Centre, 1993
   Google Scholar
• Jenkinson C, Coulter A, Wright L. Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey questionnaire: normative data from a large random sample of working age adults. BMJ 1993;306:1437–40
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware JE. SF-36 Health Survey update. Spine 2000;25:313–30
   Google Scholar
• Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NMB, O’Cathain A, Thomas KJ, Usherwood T. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: new outcome measure for primary care. BMJ 1992;305:160–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brazier J, Jones N, Kind P. Testing the validity of the Euroqol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey instrument. Qual Life Res 1993;2:169–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyons RA, Wareham K, Lucas M, Price D, Williams J, Hutchings HA. SF-36 scores vary by method of administration: implications for study design. J Public Health Med 1999;21:41–5
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brazier J, Walters SJ, Nicholl JP, Kohler B. Using the SF-36 and Euroqol in an elderly population. Qual Life Res 1996;5:195–204
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma L, Kapoor D, Issa S. Epidemiology of osteoarthritis: an update. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2006;18:147–56
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kosinski M, Keller SD, Hatoum HT, Kong S, Ware JE. The SF-36 health survey as a generic outcome measure in clinical trials of patients with osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: tests of data quality, scaling assumptions and score reliability. Med Care 1999;37: M10–22
   Google Scholar
• Blake C, Codd MB, O’Meara YM. The Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey: normative data for the Irish population. Irish J Med Sci 2000;169:195–200
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopman W, Towheed T, Anastassides T. Canadian normative data for the SF-36 Health Survey. Can Med Assoc J 2000;63:265–71
   Google Scholar
• Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Hogg-Johnson S. Choose your tool: a comparison of the psychometric properties of five generic health status instruments in workers with soft tissue injuries. Qual Life Res 1994;3:50–6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Euroqol Group. Euroqol: a new facility for the measurement of health related quality of life. Health Policy 1990;16:199–208
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stucki G, Liang MH, Philips C, Katz JN. The Short Form-36 is preferable to the SIP as a generic health measure inpatients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty. Arthritis Care Res 1995;8:174–81
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hurst NP, Kind P, Ruta D, Hunter M, Stubbings A. Measuring health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis: validity, responsiveness and reliability of Euroqol (EQ-5D). Br J Rheumatol 1997;36:551–9
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brooks R. Euroqol: the current state of play. Health Policy 1996;37:199–208
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marra CA, Rashid AA, Guh D, Kopec JA, Abrahamaowicz M, Esdaile JM, et al. Are indirect utility measures reliable and responsive in rheumatoid arthritis patients? Qual Life Res 2005;14:1333–44
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fransen M, Edmonds M. Reliability and validity of the Euroqol in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology 1999;38:807–13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kind P, Dolan P, Gudex C, Williams A. Variations in population health status: results from a United Kingdom national questionnaire survey. BMJ 1990;316:736–41
   Google Scholar
• Weigl M, Cieza A, Harder M, Geyh S, Amann E, Kostanjsek N, et al. Linking osteoarthritis-specific health status measures to the International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2003;11:519–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foley A, Halbert J, Hewitt T, Crotty M. Does hydrotherapy improve strength and physical function in patients with osteoarthritis - a randomised controlled trial comparing a gym based and a hydrotherapy based strengthening programme. Ann Rheum Dis 2004;62:1162–7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin SYC, Davey RC, Cochrane T. Community rehabilitation for older adults with osteoarthritis of the lower limb: a controlled clinical trial. Clin Rehabil 2004;18:92–101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopman-Rock M, Westhoff MH. The effects of a health educational and exercise program for older adults with osteoarthritis for the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 2000;27:1947–54
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolfe F. Determinants of WOMAC function, pain and stiffness scores: evidence for the role of low back pain, symptom counts, fatigue and depression in osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis and fibromyalgia. Rheumatology 1999;38:355–61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoeksma HL, Dekker J, Ronday K, Heering A, et al. Comparison of manual therapy and exercise therapy in osteoarthritis of the hip: a randomised clinical trial. Arthritis Rheum 2004;51:722–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stener-Victorin E, Kruse-Smidje C, Jung K. Comparison between electro-acupuncture and hydrotherapy, both in combination with patient education and patient education alone, on the symptomatic treatment of osteoarthritis of the hip. Clin J Pain 2004;20:179–85
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heuts PH. de Bie R, Drietelaar M, Aretz K, Hopman-Rock M, et al. Self management in osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: a randomized clinical trial in primary healthcare setting. J Rheumatol 2005;32:543–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cieza A, Stucki G. Content comparison of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) instruments based on the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Qual Life Res 2005;14:1225–37
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hays RD, Anderson RB, Revicki DA. Psychometric considerations in evaluating health related quality of life measures. Qual Life Res 1993;2:441–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. New York: McGraw Hill, 1994
   Google Scholar
• Sim J, Waterfield J. Validity, reliability and responsiveness in the assessment of pain. Physiother Theory Pract 1997;13:23–7
   Google Scholar
• Dromholdt E. Rehabilitation research principles and applications, 3rd edn. St Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders, 2005
   Google Scholar
• Hulley SR, Cummings SR, Browner WS, Grady D, Hearst N, Norman TB. Designing clinical research, 2nd edn. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2001
   Google Scholar
• Lin LI-K. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 1989;45:255–68
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin LI-K. A note on the concordance correlation coefficient. Biometrics 2000;56:324–5
   Google Scholar
• Rankin G, Stokes M. Reliability of assessment tools in rehabilitation: an illustration of appropriate statistical analyses. Clin Rehabil 1998;12:187–99
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruton A, Conway JH, Holgate ST. Reliability: what is it and how is it measured? Physiotherapy 2000;86:94–9
   Google Scholar
• Liang MH. Longitudinal construct validity: establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Med Care 2000;38 (Suppl 2): II-84–90
   Google Scholar
• Kirshner B, Guyatt G. A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chronic Dis 1985;38:27–36
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stratford PW, Spadoni G, Kennedy D, Westaway MD, Alcock GK. Seven points to consider when investigating a measure’s ability to detect change. Physiother Can 2002;Winter:16–24
   Google Scholar
• Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951;16:297–334
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mellenburgh GJ. Generalised linear item response theory, Psychol Bull 1994;15:300–7
   Google Scholar
• Guyatt GH, Walter S, Norman GR. Measuring change over time: assessing the usefulness of evaluative instruments. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:1129–33
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Liang MH, Larson MG, Cullen KE, Schwartz JA. Comparative measurement efficiency and sensitivity of five health status instruments for arthritis research. Arthritis Rheum 1985;28:42–7
   Google Scholar
• Deyo RA, Centor RM. Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance. J Chronic Dis 1986;39:897–906
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cohen J. Statistical power for the behavioural science. New York, Academic Press, 1977
   Google Scholar