Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Patient-reported outcome measures in osteoarthritis: a systematic search and review of their use and psychometric properties.
Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7127-213x
Show others and affiliations
Number of Authors: 122018 (English)In: RMD Open, E-ISSN 2056-5933, Vol. 4, no 2, article id e000715Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Introduction: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) or self-completed questionnaires have been used to report outcomes in osteoarthritis (OA) for over 35 years. Choices will always need to be made about what should be measured and, if relevant, what would be the most appropriate PROM to use. The current study aims to describe the available PROMs used in OA and their performance quality, so that informed choices can be made about the most appropriate PROM for a particular task.

Methods: The study included a systematic search for PROMs that have been in use over 17 years (period 2000-2016), and to catalogue their psychometric properties, and to present the evidence in a user-friendly fashion.

Results: 78 PROMs were identified with psychometric evidence available. The domains of pain, self-care, mobility and work dominated, whereas domains such as cleaning and laundry and leisure, together with psychological and contextual factors, were poorly served. The most frequently used PROMs included the Western Ontario McMaster Osteoarthritis Index, the Short Form 36 and the Knee Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score which, between them, appeared in more than 4000 papers. Most domains had at least one PROM with the highest level of psychometric evidence.

Conclusion: A broad range of PROMs are available for measuring OA outcomes. Some have good psychometric evidence, others not so. Some important psychological areas such as self-efficacy were poorly served. The study provides a current baseline for what is available, and identifies the shortfall in key domains if the full biopsychosocial model is to be explored.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. Vol. 4, no 2, article id e000715
Keywords [en]
osteoarthritis, patient, reported outcome measure, questionnaire
National Category
Clinical Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:du-30267DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2018-000715PubMedID: 30622735OAI: oai:DiVA.org:du-30267DiVA, id: diva2:1326531
Available from: 2019-06-18 Created: 2019-06-18 Last updated: 2019-06-18Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(528 kB)25 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 528 kBChecksum SHA-512
151d4caa2a32bea36c23392694c378c621436fe5daac7ebf7ee3d4d13f0ea0d1cd8be60ab29fe7c684cffa69255f79dde12561e804e25b9620118f6bc26823a9
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Palstam, Annie
In the same journal
RMD Open
Clinical Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 25 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 19 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf