The relationship between Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) and conventional objective outcome scales in patients with postoperative tibial plateau fractures

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2, 40 - 48, 30.06.2019

Zeki Taşdemir , Şevket Ergün Güzel

https://doi.org/10.33716/bmedj.519418

Öz

Objective: Patient-based outcome measures are actively utilized within
the subjective health status and functional status of life. The aim of this
study was to evaluate the correlation between existing Knee Society Score(KSS),
Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Western Ontario and
McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Medical Outcomes Study
Short Form-36 (SF-36) and to evaluate their correlation with each other as well
as to evaluate their measurement capabilities.

Materials and Methods: In the study, we have retrospectively evaluated
43 healthy knees and 43 operated knees of a total of 43 patients with Schatzker
type 2 and type 3 tibial plateau fractures that were treated surgically between
July 2010 and March 2016 in our clinic. Patients were evaluated weekly with
SF-36 General Physical Functional Score and also with the WOMAC, KSS and KOOS
scoring systems, which are scoring systems that are used to address
specifically the problems with the knee joint.

Result and Conclusion: The KSS Functional Score and the KOOS Daily
Functional Score were found to be reliable for the functional evaluation of the
knee joint. We believe that the numerical scoring system used by WOMAC
Functional Scoring causes distraction and we believe that the measurement
effectiveness is reduced as a result. As a result of this study, we think that
we need to be very careful when selecting and using evaluation scales where the
responses are first matched to numerical values.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Short Form-36, Tibial Plateau Fractures, Knee joint

Postoperatif tibia plato kırıklı hastalarda Tıbbi Sonuç Çalışması Kısa Form 36 (SF-36) ile konvansiyonel objektif sonuç ölçekleri arasındaki ilişki.

Öz

Amaç: Hasta temelli
sonuç ölçütleri, öznel sağlık durumu ve yaşamın fonksiyonel durumu içerisinde
aktif olarak kullanılmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, mevcut Diz Topluluğu Skoru
(KSS), Diz Yaralanması ve Osteoartrit Sonuç Skoru (KOOS), Western Ontario ve
McMaster Üniversitesi Osteoartrit Endeksi (WOMAC) ile Tıbbi Sonuçlar Çalışması
Kısa Form-36 (SF) arasındaki ilişkiyi değerlendirmektir.

Yöntem: Çalışmada
kliniğimizde Temmuz 2010 - Mart 2016 tarihleri arasında cerrahi olarak tedavi
edilen Schatzker tip 2 ve tip 3 tibial plato kırığı olan toplam 43 hastanın 43
sağlıklı dizini ve 43 ameliyatlı dizini retrospektif olarak değerlendirdik.
Hastalar haftalık olarak SF-36 Genel Fiziksel Fonksiyonel Puan ve ayrıca diz
eklemi ile ilgili sorunları çözmek için kullanılan skorlama sistemleri olan
WOMAC, KSS ve KOOS puanlama sistemleri ile değerlendirildi.

Sonuç ve Tartışma: KSS
Fonksiyonel Skoru ve KOOS Günlük Fonksiyonel Skoru, diz ekleminin fonksiyonel
değerlendirmesi için güvenilir bulundu. WOMAC fiziksel fonksiyon sonuçları ile
KOOS günlük fonksiyon sonuçları arasındaki korelasyonun pozitif yönde ve% 99
güven düzeyinde anlamlı olduğu bulundu.

Anket kullanımıyla
yaşam kalitesini değerlendirmek ve matematiksel değerler sağlamak mümkündür. Anketlerde,
toplumlara uyumlarını değerlendirmek ve ayrıca aralarındaki ilişkiyi
değerlendirmek gereklidir. Bu çalışma sonucunda, yanıtların ilk önce sayısal
değerlerle eşleştiği değerlendirme ölçeklerini seçerken ve kullanırken çok
dikkatli olmamız gerektiğini düşünüyoruz.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Kısa Form-36, Tibial Plato Kırıkları, Diz Eklemi

Kaynakça

• 1. Boers M, Kirwan JR, Wells G, Beaton D, Gossec L, d'Agostino MA, et al. Developing core outcome measurement sets for clinical trials: OMERACT filter 2.0. J Clin Epidemiol 2014;67:745e53.
• 2. Brazier JE, Harper R, Munro J, Walters SJ, Snaith ML. Generic and condition-specific outcome measures for people with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology (Oxford) 1999;38:870e7.
• 3. Koçyiğit, H, Aydemir Ö, Fişek G, Ölmez N, & Memiş AK Form-36 (KF-36)’nın Türkçe versiyonunun güvenilirliği ve geçerliliği. Ilaç ve tedavi dergisi 1999;12(1):102-6.
• 4. Tüzün EH, Eker L, Aytar A, Daşkapan A, Bayramoğlu M. Acceptability, reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Turkish version of WOMAC osteoarthritis index. Osteoarthritis and cartilage 2005;13(1):28-33.
• 5. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of OMAC: 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;15:1833e40.
• 6. Gul ED, Yilmaz O, Bodur H. Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score-physical function short-form (KOOS-PS). Journal of back and musculoskeletal rehabilitation 2013;26(4):461-466.
• 7. Insall, John N, et al. "Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system." Clin Orthop relat res 248.248 (1989): 13-14.
• 8. Altman R, Brandt K, Hochberg M, Moskowitz R, Bellamy N, Bloch DA, et al. Design and conduct of clinical trials in patients with osteoarthritis: recommendations from a task force of the Osteoarthritis Research Society. Results from a workshop. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1996;4:217e43.
• 9. Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiologic assessment of osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis, 1987; 16: 494-501.
• 10. Guccione AA, Felson DT, Anderson JJ. Defining arthritis and measuring functional status in elders: methodological issues in the study of disease and physical disability. Am J Public Health 1990;80:945e9.
• 11. Summers MN, Haley WE, Reveille JD, Alarcon GS. Radiographic assessment and psychologic variables as predictors of pain and functional impairment in osteoarthritis of the knee or hip. Arthritis Rheum 1988; 31:204e9.
• 12. Creamer P, Lethbridge-Cejku M, Hochberg MC. Factors associated with functional impairment in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis. Rheumatology 2000;39: 490e6.
• 13. Salaffi F, Leardini G, Canesi B, Mannoni A, Fioravanti A, Caporali R, et al. Reliability and validity of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index in Italian patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2003;11:551e60.
• 14. Salaffi F, Cavalieri F, Nolli M, Ferraccioli G. Analysis of disability in knee osteoarthritis. Relationship with age and psychological variables but not with radiographic score. J Rheumatol 1991;18:1581e6.
• 15. McAlindon TE, Cooper C, Kirwan JR, Dieppe PA. Determinants of disability in osteoarthritis of the knee. Ann Rheum Dis 1993;52:258e62.
• 16. Odding E, Valkenburg HA, Algra D, Vandenouweland FA, Grobbee DE, Hofman A. Associations of radiological osteoarthritis of the hip and knee with locomotor disability in the Rotterdam Study. Ann Rheum Dis 1998;57:203e8.
• 17. Collins NJ, Prinsen CAC, Christensen R, Bartels EM, Terwee CB, Roos EM. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): systematic review and meta-analysis of measurement properties. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage 2016;24(8):1317-1329.
• 18. Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)edevelopment of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1998;28:88e96
• 19. Liljensøe A, Lauersen JO, Søballe K, Mechlenburg I. Overweight preoperatively impairs clinical outcome after knee arthroplasty: a cohort study of 197 patients 3–5 years after surgery. Acta orthopaedica 2013;84(4):392-397.
• 20. Roos EM, Toksvig-Larsen S. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)–validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement. Health and quality of life outcomes 2003; 1(1): 17.