4.6 Article

Cross-cultural validation of the ICOAP and physical function short forms of the HOOS and KOOS in a multi-country study of patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis

Journal

OSTEOARTHRITIS AND CARTILAGE
Volume 24, Issue 12, Pages 2077-2081

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2016.07.014

Keywords

ICOAP; HOOS-PS; KOOS-PS; Hip or knee osteoarthritis; Cross-cultural validation

Funding

  1. scientific society (OARSI)
  2. scientific society (MERACT)
  3. Pfizer
  4. Expansciences
  5. Novartis
  6. Negma Lerads
  7. Rottapharm
  8. Fidia
  9. Pierre Fabre Sante laboratories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate the internal consistency and construct validity of the Physical Function short forms for the Hip and Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (HOOS-PS/KOOS-PS) and the Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP) in a nine country study of patients consulting for total hip or knee replacement (THR or TKR). Methods: Patients completed HOOS-PS or KOOS-PS, ICOAP and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities' Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain and physical function subscales at their consultation visit. Internal consistency was calculated using Cronbach's alpha. The association of HOOS-PS/KOOS-PS and ICOAP with WOMAC pain and function subscales was calculated with Spearman correlation coefficients with 95% confidence intervals. Results: HOOS-PS/KOOS-PS and ICOAP demonstrated high internal consistency across countries (alpha 0.75-0.96 (hip) and 0.76-0.95 (knee)). Both HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS demonstrated high correlations (0.76-0.90 and 0.75-0.91, respectively) with WOMAC function in all countries. ICOAP exhibited moderate to high correlations with WOMAC pain and function subscales (0.53-0.84 (hip) and 0.43-0.84 (knee)). Conclusion: The psychometric properties of the HOOS-PS/KOOS-PS, and ICOAP were maintained across all countries. (C) 2016 Osteoarthritis Research Society International. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available