Evaluation of the Validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by Correlation to the SF-36

Evaluation of the Validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by Correlation to the SF-36

This study evaluates the validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by examining their level of correlation to the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) in patients with foot and ankle complaints. The SF-36 is an extensively validated outcomes tool that has been used as a benchmark in exam...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Foot & ankle international 2003-01, Vol.24 (1), p.50-55
Hauptverfasser: SooHoo, Nelson Fong, Shuler, Michael, Fleming, Lamar L.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Foot Diseases - therapy
Health Status Indicators
Humans
Orthopedics
Outcome Assessment (Health Care) - standards
Societies, Medical
Surveys and Questionnaires - standards
United States
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 55
container_issue 1
container_start_page 50
container_title Foot & ankle international
container_volume 24
creator SooHoo, Nelson Fong
Shuler, Michael
Fleming, Lamar L.
description This study evaluates the validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by examining their level of correlation to the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) in patients with foot and ankle complaints. The SF-36 is an extensively validated outcomes tool that has been used as a benchmark in examining the validity of outcomes instruments designed for the upper extremity, knee, shoulder, and general orthopaedic conditions. The study sample was 91 patients seen at the foot and ankle clinic of a university-based orthopaedic practice. Patients were administered both the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems and SF-36 instruments. Pearson correlation coefficients of the AOFAS scores to the SF-36 sub-scales ranged from 0.02 to 0.36 in the overall study population. Correlation was higher for the sub-set of patients with ankle-hindfoot disorders (0.11 to 0.53) than patients with forefoot disorders (−0.05 to 0.25). The low levels of correlation seen in this study suggest poor construct validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/107110070302400108
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72975129</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_107110070302400108</sage_id><sourcerecordid>72975129</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-6534730474160284cc5e930dfead3060102ce777c79e57e25279334b91b77c273</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLw0AUhQdRbK3-ARcyK3ex80puZllKq0KhYNWNizCZTGrKJKmZRMi_d2oqLgRX98F3DpyD0DUld5QCTCkBSgkBwgkThFASn6AxlUIEEEN06ncPBAdihC6c23kEOJXnaERZ6AUxG6O3xaeynWqLusJ1jtt3g1-VLbKi7X_u2Xo52-C5LapCK4ufPFxt8aZ3rSkdTns8r5vG2MGjrb81m2XAo0t0livrzNVxTtDLcvE8fwhW6_vH-WwVaM5lG0QhF8CJAEEjwmKhdWgkJ1luVMZJ5HMxbQBAgzQhGBYykJyLVNLUPxnwCbodfPdN_dEZ1yZl4bSxVlWm7lwCTEJImfQgG0Dd1M41Jk_2TVGqpk8oSQ6VJn8r9aKbo3uXlib7lRw79MB0AJzammRXd03l0_5n-QXpFHrO</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>72975129</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of the Validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by Correlation to the SF-36</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SAGE Complete</source><creator>SooHoo, Nelson Fong ; Shuler, Michael ; Fleming, Lamar L.</creator><creatorcontrib>SooHoo, Nelson Fong ; Shuler, Michael ; Fleming, Lamar L. ; American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society</creatorcontrib><description>This study evaluates the validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by examining their level of correlation to the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) in patients with foot and ankle complaints. The SF-36 is an extensively validated outcomes tool that has been used as a benchmark in examining the validity of outcomes instruments designed for the upper extremity, knee, shoulder, and general orthopaedic conditions. The study sample was 91 patients seen at the foot and ankle clinic of a university-based orthopaedic practice. Patients were administered both the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems and SF-36 instruments. Pearson correlation coefficients of the AOFAS scores to the SF-36 sub-scales ranged from 0.02 to 0.36 in the overall study population. Correlation was higher for the sub-set of patients with ankle-hindfoot disorders (0.11 to 0.53) than patients with forefoot disorders (−0.05 to 0.25). The low levels of correlation seen in this study suggest poor construct validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1071-1007</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-7876</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/107110070302400108</identifier><identifier>PMID: 12540082</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Foot Diseases - therapy ; Health Status Indicators ; Humans ; Orthopedics ; Outcome Assessment (Health Care) - standards ; Societies, Medical ; Surveys and Questionnaires - standards ; United States</subject><ispartof>Foot &amp; ankle international, 2003-01, Vol.24 (1), p.50-55</ispartof><rights>2003 American Orthopaedic Foot &amp; Ankle Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-6534730474160284cc5e930dfead3060102ce777c79e57e25279334b91b77c273</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-6534730474160284cc5e930dfead3060102ce777c79e57e25279334b91b77c273</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/107110070302400108$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/107110070302400108$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12540082$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>SooHoo, Nelson Fong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shuler, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fleming, Lamar L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of the Validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by Correlation to the SF-36</title><title>Foot &amp; ankle international</title><addtitle>Foot Ankle Int</addtitle><description>This study evaluates the validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by examining their level of correlation to the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) in patients with foot and ankle complaints. The SF-36 is an extensively validated outcomes tool that has been used as a benchmark in examining the validity of outcomes instruments designed for the upper extremity, knee, shoulder, and general orthopaedic conditions. The study sample was 91 patients seen at the foot and ankle clinic of a university-based orthopaedic practice. Patients were administered both the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems and SF-36 instruments. Pearson correlation coefficients of the AOFAS scores to the SF-36 sub-scales ranged from 0.02 to 0.36 in the overall study population. Correlation was higher for the sub-set of patients with ankle-hindfoot disorders (0.11 to 0.53) than patients with forefoot disorders (−0.05 to 0.25). The low levels of correlation seen in this study suggest poor construct validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems.</description><subject>Foot Diseases - therapy</subject><subject>Health Status Indicators</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Outcome Assessment (Health Care) - standards</subject><subject>Societies, Medical</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires - standards</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>1071-1007</issn><issn>1944-7876</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtLw0AUhQdRbK3-ARcyK3ex80puZllKq0KhYNWNizCZTGrKJKmZRMi_d2oqLgRX98F3DpyD0DUld5QCTCkBSgkBwgkThFASn6AxlUIEEEN06ncPBAdihC6c23kEOJXnaERZ6AUxG6O3xaeynWqLusJ1jtt3g1-VLbKi7X_u2Xo52-C5LapCK4ufPFxt8aZ3rSkdTns8r5vG2MGjrb81m2XAo0t0livrzNVxTtDLcvE8fwhW6_vH-WwVaM5lG0QhF8CJAEEjwmKhdWgkJ1luVMZJ5HMxbQBAgzQhGBYykJyLVNLUPxnwCbodfPdN_dEZ1yZl4bSxVlWm7lwCTEJImfQgG0Dd1M41Jk_2TVGqpk8oSQ6VJn8r9aKbo3uXlib7lRw79MB0AJzammRXd03l0_5n-QXpFHrO</recordid><startdate>200301</startdate><enddate>200301</enddate><creator>SooHoo, Nelson Fong</creator><creator>Shuler, Michael</creator><creator>Fleming, Lamar L.</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200301</creationdate><title>Evaluation of the Validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by Correlation to the SF-36</title><author>SooHoo, Nelson Fong ; Shuler, Michael ; Fleming, Lamar L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c339t-6534730474160284cc5e930dfead3060102ce777c79e57e25279334b91b77c273</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Foot Diseases - therapy</topic><topic>Health Status Indicators</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Outcome Assessment (Health Care) - standards</topic><topic>Societies, Medical</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires - standards</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>SooHoo, Nelson Fong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shuler, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fleming, Lamar L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Foot &amp; ankle international</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>SooHoo, Nelson Fong</au><au>Shuler, Michael</au><au>Fleming, Lamar L.</au><aucorp>American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of the Validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by Correlation to the SF-36</atitle><jtitle>Foot &amp; ankle international</jtitle><addtitle>Foot Ankle Int</addtitle><date>2003-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>50</spage><epage>55</epage><pages>50-55</pages><issn>1071-1007</issn><eissn>1944-7876</eissn><abstract>This study evaluates the validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by examining their level of correlation to the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 (SF-36) in patients with foot and ankle complaints. The SF-36 is an extensively validated outcomes tool that has been used as a benchmark in examining the validity of outcomes instruments designed for the upper extremity, knee, shoulder, and general orthopaedic conditions. The study sample was 91 patients seen at the foot and ankle clinic of a university-based orthopaedic practice. Patients were administered both the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems and SF-36 instruments. Pearson correlation coefficients of the AOFAS scores to the SF-36 sub-scales ranged from 0.02 to 0.36 in the overall study population. Correlation was higher for the sub-set of patients with ankle-hindfoot disorders (0.11 to 0.53) than patients with forefoot disorders (−0.05 to 0.25). The low levels of correlation seen in this study suggest poor construct validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems.</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><pmid>12540082</pmid><doi>10.1177/107110070302400108</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1071-1007
ispartof Foot & ankle international, 2003-01, Vol.24 (1), p.50-55
issn 1071-1007
1944-7876
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72975129
source MEDLINE; SAGE Complete
subjects Foot Diseases - therapy
Health Status Indicators
Humans
Orthopedics
Outcome Assessment (Health Care) - standards
Societies, Medical
Surveys and Questionnaires - standards
United States
title Evaluation of the Validity of the AOFAS Clinical Rating Systems by Correlation to the SF-36
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T16%3A12%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20the%20Validity%20of%20the%20AOFAS%20Clinical%20Rating%20Systems%20by%20Correlation%20to%20the%20SF-36&rft.jtitle=Foot%20&%20ankle%20international&rft.au=SooHoo,%20Nelson%20Fong&rft.aucorp=American%20Orthopaedic%20Foot%20and%20Ankle%20Society&rft.date=2003-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=50&rft.epage=55&rft.pages=50-55&rft.issn=1071-1007&rft.eissn=1944-7876&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/107110070302400108&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E72975129%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=72975129&rft_id=info:pmid/12540082&rft_sage_id=10.1177_107110070302400108&rfr_iscdi=true