Nederlandstalige patiëntgerapporteerde uitkomstmaten voor voet- en enkelaandoeningen; Een systematisch overzicht

Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde(2015)

引用 23|浏览8
暂无评分
摘要
To investigate which valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are available for foot and ankle disorders in the Dutch population, and which of these is the most suitable for uniform use. Systematic review. PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar were systematically searched for relevant articles; subsequently two researchers screened first the title and the abstract, and then the full article within a selection of these articles. Studies that described a validation process for foot- and ankle-PROMs in a Dutch population were included. Data on measurement characteristics and translation procedure were extracted, and methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the COSMIN checklist. (u0027COSMINu0027 stands for u0027Consensus-based standards for the selection of health status measurement instrumentsu0027.) Two general foot- and ankle-PROMs in the Dutch language were validated: the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and the Foot and Ankle Ability Measurement (FAAM); two foot-PROMs: the Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index (MFPDI) and the 5-point Foot Function Index (FFI-5pt) were also validated. There were also two disorder-specific PROMs available in Dutch: the Victorian Institute of Sports Assessment-Achilles (VISA-A) for Achilles tendinopathies and the Foot Impact Scale for Rheumatoid Arthritis (FIS-RA) for rheumatoid arthritis patients. The FAOS and the FFI-5pt showed the strongest evidence for having good measurement characteristics. Currently, we regard the FAOS as the most appropriate foot- and ankle-PROM for general foot and ankle problems. Further studies of higher methodological quality are, however, required to draw firmer conclusions
更多
查看译文
AI 理解论文
溯源树
样例
生成溯源树,研究论文发展脉络
Chat Paper
正在生成论文摘要