4.4 Article

Clinimetric testing of the Persian version of the Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaires in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy

Journal

DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION
Volume 44, Issue 12, Pages 2902-2907

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2020.1844318

Keywords

Tennis elbow; longitudinal validity; responsiveness; lateral elbow tendinopathy; PRTEE; MDC; MCID; DASH

Categories

Funding

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research Chair in Gender, Work and Health
  2. Dr James Roth Chair in Musculoskeletal Measurement and Knowledge Translation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study aims to evaluate the longitudinal validity and responsiveness of PRTEE and DASH in patients with LET. The results showed that both PRTEE and DASH were responsive in detecting improvement in patients, but PRTEE was slightly more efficient and responsive than DASH.
Purpose To evaluate the longitudinal validity and responsiveness of the Persian version of Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation (PRTEE) and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) in patients with lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET). Methods Sixty-four patients with LET completed the PRTEE, DASH, and Global Rating of Change Scale (GRC) at baseline and six weeks. The external and internal responsiveness, floor and ceiling effects, minimal detectable change (MDC) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) were calculated. Results No ceiling and floor effects were detected for either the PRTEE or DASH. External responsiveness as an indicator to detect the relationship between change in the measured and external indicator of change was acceptable for both, but higher for the PRTEE (AUC = 0.90; CI: 0.83-0.97) vs. DASH (AUC = 0.80; CI: 69-90). Internal responsiveness to detect intervention related changes indicated slightly superiority in responsiveness for PRTEE. The relative efficiency (1.21), standard effect size (1.14 PRTEE vs. 1.03 DASH), and standard response mean (1.34 PRTEE vs. 1.10 DASH). The MDC were 11 and 12, and MCID were 20 and 18 for the PRTEE and DASH, respectively. Conclusions Both the DASH and PRTEE were responsive in detecting improvement in patients with LET. The PRTEE was shorter, more efficient, and slightly more responsive which supports its use as a core outcome measure in evaluating patients with LET.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available