4.3 Article

The development,and evaluation of a disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire for disorders of the rotator cuff: The Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index

期刊

CLINICAL JOURNAL OF SPORT MEDICINE
卷 13, 期 2, 页码 84-92

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00042752-200303000-00004

关键词

health-related quality of life; measurement of outcome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop a valid and reliable disease-specific quality-of-life measurement tool for patients with rotator cuff disease. Design: Health-related quality-of-life measurement tool development. Methods: Methodology for the development and evaluation of the tool included the following: 1) identification of a specific patient population, 2) generation of potential items, 3) item reduction, 4) pretesting the prototype instrument, 5) determination of reliability, and 6) validation. Results: The final instrument, the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index,double dagger has 21 items representing five domains, each with a Visual Analog Scale-type response option. Construct validation demonstrated that this instrument correlated predictably with other measurement tools (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand outcome measure; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form; University of California Los Angeles Shoulder Rating Scale; Constant Score; Rowe; Sickness Impact Profile; Short Form 36; and range of motion; 21 of 21 correlations within 0.19). Reliability was very high at 2 weeks, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.96 and was more responsive (sensitive to change) than the other five shoulder measurement tools, global health instruments, and range of motion. Conclusions: This measurement tool can be used as the primary outcome in clinical trials evaluating treatments in this patient population, although its features are equally attractive for monitoring patients' progress in clinical practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据