Validity of five foot and ankle specific electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) instruments in patients undergoing elective orthopedic foot or ankle surgery

6533b7d5fe1ef96bd1265298

RESEARCH PRODUCT

Validity of five foot and ankle specific electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) instruments in patients undergoing elective orthopedic foot or ankle surgery

Risto P. Roine Antti Latvala Mika Sampo Timo Sirola Mikko Miettinen Arja Häkkinen Outi Ilves Alar Toom Anna Sandbacka Ville T. Ponkilainen Jussi P. Repo Jan Lindahl Henrik Sandelin Mikko M. Uimonen

subject

Male psychometrics Visual Analog Scale clinimetrics leikkaushoito 0302 clinical medicine Surveys and Questionnaires Electronic Health Records Orthopedics and Sports Medicine Patient-reported outcome validation 030222 orthopedics Middle Aged Electronic patient-reported outcome PRO MEASURES 3. Good health psykometriikka medicine.anatomical_structure Convergent validity validointi Female Patient-reported outcome EQUIVALENCE Foot (unit)medicine.medical_specialty Psychometrics Visual analogue scale QUESTIONNAIRE patient-reported outcome VALIDATION ANALOG SCALE FOOT ePRO 03 medical and health sciences Clinimetrics ankle medicine QUALITY COSMIN Humans Patient Reported Outcome Measures Foot business.industry Reproducibility of Results Construct validity 030229 sport sciences 3126 Surgery anesthesiology intensive care radiology jalat Surgery SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS nilkat hoitotulokset foot Orthopedic surgery PAPER Ankle Ankle business Ankle Joint TASK-FORCE

description

Background: Patient-reported outcomes (PROS) are widely accepted measures for evaluating outcomes of surgical interventions. As patient-reported information is stored in electronic health records, it is essential that there are valid electronic PRO (ePRO) instruments available for clinicians and researchers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of electronic versions of five widely used foot and ankle specific PRO instruments. Methods: Altogether 111 consecutive elective foot/ankle surgery patients were invited face-to-face to participate in this study. Patients completed electronic versions of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), the modified Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS), the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ), and the Visual Analogue Scale Foot and Ankle (VAS-FA) on the day of elective foot and/or ankle surgery. Construct validity, coverage, and targeting of the scales were assessed. Results: Based on general and predefined thresholds, construct validity, coverage, and targeting of the ePRO versions of the FAAM, the FAOS, the MOXFQ, and the VAS-FA were acceptable. Major issues arose with score distribution and convergent validity of the modified LEFS instrument. Conclusions: The ePRO versions of the FAAM, the FAOS, the MOXFQ and the VAS-FA provide valid scores for foot and ankle patients. However, our findings do not support the use of the modified LEFS as an electronic outcome measure for patients with orthopedic foot and/or ankle pathologies. (C) 2020 European Foot and Ankle Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Peer reviewed

year	journal	country	edition	language
2019-08-12	Foot and Ankle Surgery

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fas.2020.02.003