Comparing the responsiveness of a generic and a musculoskeletal specific functional outcome measure in orthopaedic patients with operative fixation of pelvic ring, acetabulum, or tibia fractures: a comparison between single injury and multiply injured patients

Comparing the responsiveness of a generic and a musculoskeletal specific functional outcome measure in orthopaedic patients with operative fixation of pelvic ring, acetabulum, or tibia fractures: a comparison between single injury and multiply injured patients

This study compares the responsiveness, or the ability to detect clinical change in a disease, between the generic Short Form-36 (SF-36) and musculoskeletal specific Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the orthopaedic trauma population. Str...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma 2021-06, Vol.4 (2), p.e126-e126
Hauptverfasser: Sepehri, Aresh, Sleat, Graham K.J., O’Brien, Peter J., Broekhuyse, Henry M., Guy, Pierre, Lefaivre, Kelly A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Clinical/Basic Science
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e126
container_issue 2
container_start_page e126
container_title OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma
container_volume 4
creator Sepehri, Aresh
Sleat, Graham K.J.
O’Brien, Peter J.
Broekhuyse, Henry M.
Guy, Pierre
Lefaivre, Kelly A.
description This study compares the responsiveness, or the ability to detect clinical change in a disease, between the generic Short Form-36 (SF-36) and musculoskeletal specific Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the orthopaedic trauma population. Stratified analysis was performed to compare whether responsiveness differs between patients with single or multiple orthopaedic injuries. Prospective case series. Level 1 Trauma Center. A total of 659 patients with orthopaedic trauma injuries to the pelvis, acetabulum, or tibia were included for analysis. There were 485 patients with a single isolated injury and 174 patients with multiple orthopaedic injuries. None. Responsiveness was calculated through the standard response mean (SRM), the proportion meeting a minimal clinically important difference, and floor and ceiling effects. Between baseline and 6 months the magnitude of the SRM for SF-36 was consistently greater than that of SMFA in patients with single (  
doi_str_mv 10.1097/OI9.0000000000000126
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8568436</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2595105707</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2476-26c601ea475062b249ebb64587e30d5a6ff37641cf1e5a6c0a3f2eec60e64f2d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdUktv1DAQDqiIVqX_ACEfOTTFcRxnwwEJrXhUqtQLnC3HGW_cOnbwY5f99zhsWRZ8sWfme1maonhd4ZsKd-27-9vuBp-eirDnxQVpWlqSirVnJ-_z4iqEhwXTdR1rqpfFeU1byljTXTw7W7tpFl7bDYojIA9hdjboLVgIATmFBNrkt9cSCTvkakpBJuPCIxiIwqAwg9Qqj1WyMmpnc8-lKN0EaAIRkgekLXI-jm4WMGTkLKIGGwPa6TgiN4PPjS0gpX-KRWGxncFsM3QJdo2EzFZ9Mmm6zkIo6l4LpLyQMauH9zmVPPwiZHIPcQdgUchUs3g_JL__HX5KJurZ7A89GI5BXhUvlDABrp7uy-L750_f1l_Lu_svt-uPd6UktGUlYZLhCgRtG8xIT2gHfc9os2qhxkMjmFJ1y2glVQW5kljUigBkEjCqyFBfFh8OunPqJxhk9vbC8NnrSfg9d0LzfydWj3zjtnzVsBWtWRZ4-yTg3Y8EIfJJBwnGCAsuBU6arqlw0-I2Q-kBKr0LwYM62lSYLzvE8w7x_3co096cRjyS_mzMX92dMxF8eDRpB56PIEwcOSa47lpalwSTCrMsWi7KrP4FdiHajg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2595105707</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparing the responsiveness of a generic and a musculoskeletal specific functional outcome measure in orthopaedic patients with operative fixation of pelvic ring, acetabulum, or tibia fractures: a comparison between single injury and multiply injured patients</title><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Sepehri, Aresh ; Sleat, Graham K.J. ; O’Brien, Peter J. ; Broekhuyse, Henry M. ; Guy, Pierre ; Lefaivre, Kelly A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Sepehri, Aresh ; Sleat, Graham K.J. ; O’Brien, Peter J. ; Broekhuyse, Henry M. ; Guy, Pierre ; Lefaivre, Kelly A.</creatorcontrib><description>This study compares the responsiveness, or the ability to detect clinical change in a disease, between the generic Short Form-36 (SF-36) and musculoskeletal specific Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the orthopaedic trauma population. Stratified analysis was performed to compare whether responsiveness differs between patients with single or multiple orthopaedic injuries. Prospective case series. Level 1 Trauma Center. A total of 659 patients with orthopaedic trauma injuries to the pelvis, acetabulum, or tibia were included for analysis. There were 485 patients with a single isolated injury and 174 patients with multiple orthopaedic injuries. None. Responsiveness was calculated through the standard response mean (SRM), the proportion meeting a minimal clinically important difference, and floor and ceiling effects. Between baseline and 6 months the magnitude of the SRM for SF-36 was consistently greater than that of SMFA in patients with single (  &lt; .01) and multiple injuries (  &lt; .01). Between 6 and 12 months, there were no differences in SRM across all cohorts. The proportion of patients who achieved minimal clinically important difference was consistently higher when assessed with SF-36 compared with SMFA between baseline and 6 months (81.8% vs 68.1%,  &lt; .0001) and between 6 and 12 months (63.3% vs 55.4%,  = .01).A ceiling effect was only observed at baseline for the SMFA with 16.6% of patients achieving the maximal level of functioning detectable. No floor effects were seen in either PROM. This study demonstrates that SF-36 has superior responsiveness versus SMFA in both polytrauma and isolated injury patients and supports the collection of SF-36 as the primary PROM in prospective orthopaedic trauma studies irrespective of whether the patient has an isolated injury or multiple injuries.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2574-2167</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2574-2167</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/OI9.0000000000000126</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34746659</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</publisher><subject>Clinical/Basic Science</subject><ispartof>OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma, 2021-06, Vol.4 (2), p.e126-e126</ispartof><rights>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association. 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2476-26c601ea475062b249ebb64587e30d5a6ff37641cf1e5a6c0a3f2eec60e64f2d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8568436/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8568436/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,860,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34746659$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sepehri, Aresh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sleat, Graham K.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O’Brien, Peter J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broekhuyse, Henry M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guy, Pierre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lefaivre, Kelly A.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparing the responsiveness of a generic and a musculoskeletal specific functional outcome measure in orthopaedic patients with operative fixation of pelvic ring, acetabulum, or tibia fractures: a comparison between single injury and multiply injured patients</title><title>OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma</title><addtitle>OTA Int</addtitle><description>This study compares the responsiveness, or the ability to detect clinical change in a disease, between the generic Short Form-36 (SF-36) and musculoskeletal specific Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the orthopaedic trauma population. Stratified analysis was performed to compare whether responsiveness differs between patients with single or multiple orthopaedic injuries. Prospective case series. Level 1 Trauma Center. A total of 659 patients with orthopaedic trauma injuries to the pelvis, acetabulum, or tibia were included for analysis. There were 485 patients with a single isolated injury and 174 patients with multiple orthopaedic injuries. None. Responsiveness was calculated through the standard response mean (SRM), the proportion meeting a minimal clinically important difference, and floor and ceiling effects. Between baseline and 6 months the magnitude of the SRM for SF-36 was consistently greater than that of SMFA in patients with single (  &lt; .01) and multiple injuries (  &lt; .01). Between 6 and 12 months, there were no differences in SRM across all cohorts. The proportion of patients who achieved minimal clinically important difference was consistently higher when assessed with SF-36 compared with SMFA between baseline and 6 months (81.8% vs 68.1%,  &lt; .0001) and between 6 and 12 months (63.3% vs 55.4%,  = .01).A ceiling effect was only observed at baseline for the SMFA with 16.6% of patients achieving the maximal level of functioning detectable. No floor effects were seen in either PROM. This study demonstrates that SF-36 has superior responsiveness versus SMFA in both polytrauma and isolated injury patients and supports the collection of SF-36 as the primary PROM in prospective orthopaedic trauma studies irrespective of whether the patient has an isolated injury or multiple injuries.</description><subject>Clinical/Basic Science</subject><issn>2574-2167</issn><issn>2574-2167</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpdUktv1DAQDqiIVqX_ACEfOTTFcRxnwwEJrXhUqtQLnC3HGW_cOnbwY5f99zhsWRZ8sWfme1maonhd4ZsKd-27-9vuBp-eirDnxQVpWlqSirVnJ-_z4iqEhwXTdR1rqpfFeU1byljTXTw7W7tpFl7bDYojIA9hdjboLVgIATmFBNrkt9cSCTvkakpBJuPCIxiIwqAwg9Qqj1WyMmpnc8-lKN0EaAIRkgekLXI-jm4WMGTkLKIGGwPa6TgiN4PPjS0gpX-KRWGxncFsM3QJdo2EzFZ9Mmm6zkIo6l4LpLyQMauH9zmVPPwiZHIPcQdgUchUs3g_JL__HX5KJurZ7A89GI5BXhUvlDABrp7uy-L750_f1l_Lu_svt-uPd6UktGUlYZLhCgRtG8xIT2gHfc9os2qhxkMjmFJ1y2glVQW5kljUigBkEjCqyFBfFh8OunPqJxhk9vbC8NnrSfg9d0LzfydWj3zjtnzVsBWtWRZ4-yTg3Y8EIfJJBwnGCAsuBU6arqlw0-I2Q-kBKr0LwYM62lSYLzvE8w7x_3co096cRjyS_mzMX92dMxF8eDRpB56PIEwcOSa47lpalwSTCrMsWi7KrP4FdiHajg</recordid><startdate>202106</startdate><enddate>202106</enddate><creator>Sepehri, Aresh</creator><creator>Sleat, Graham K.J.</creator><creator>O’Brien, Peter J.</creator><creator>Broekhuyse, Henry M.</creator><creator>Guy, Pierre</creator><creator>Lefaivre, Kelly A.</creator><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202106</creationdate><title>Comparing the responsiveness of a generic and a musculoskeletal specific functional outcome measure in orthopaedic patients with operative fixation of pelvic ring, acetabulum, or tibia fractures: a comparison between single injury and multiply injured patients</title><author>Sepehri, Aresh ; Sleat, Graham K.J. ; O’Brien, Peter J. ; Broekhuyse, Henry M. ; Guy, Pierre ; Lefaivre, Kelly A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2476-26c601ea475062b249ebb64587e30d5a6ff37641cf1e5a6c0a3f2eec60e64f2d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Clinical/Basic Science</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sepehri, Aresh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sleat, Graham K.J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>O’Brien, Peter J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Broekhuyse, Henry M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guy, Pierre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lefaivre, Kelly A.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sepehri, Aresh</au><au>Sleat, Graham K.J.</au><au>O’Brien, Peter J.</au><au>Broekhuyse, Henry M.</au><au>Guy, Pierre</au><au>Lefaivre, Kelly A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparing the responsiveness of a generic and a musculoskeletal specific functional outcome measure in orthopaedic patients with operative fixation of pelvic ring, acetabulum, or tibia fractures: a comparison between single injury and multiply injured patients</atitle><jtitle>OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma</jtitle><addtitle>OTA Int</addtitle><date>2021-06</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>4</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>e126</spage><epage>e126</epage><pages>e126-e126</pages><issn>2574-2167</issn><eissn>2574-2167</eissn><abstract>This study compares the responsiveness, or the ability to detect clinical change in a disease, between the generic Short Form-36 (SF-36) and musculoskeletal specific Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment (SMFA) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in the orthopaedic trauma population. Stratified analysis was performed to compare whether responsiveness differs between patients with single or multiple orthopaedic injuries. Prospective case series. Level 1 Trauma Center. A total of 659 patients with orthopaedic trauma injuries to the pelvis, acetabulum, or tibia were included for analysis. There were 485 patients with a single isolated injury and 174 patients with multiple orthopaedic injuries. None. Responsiveness was calculated through the standard response mean (SRM), the proportion meeting a minimal clinically important difference, and floor and ceiling effects. Between baseline and 6 months the magnitude of the SRM for SF-36 was consistently greater than that of SMFA in patients with single (  &lt; .01) and multiple injuries (  &lt; .01). Between 6 and 12 months, there were no differences in SRM across all cohorts. The proportion of patients who achieved minimal clinically important difference was consistently higher when assessed with SF-36 compared with SMFA between baseline and 6 months (81.8% vs 68.1%,  &lt; .0001) and between 6 and 12 months (63.3% vs 55.4%,  = .01).A ceiling effect was only observed at baseline for the SMFA with 16.6% of patients achieving the maximal level of functioning detectable. No floor effects were seen in either PROM. This study demonstrates that SF-36 has superior responsiveness versus SMFA in both polytrauma and isolated injury patients and supports the collection of SF-36 as the primary PROM in prospective orthopaedic trauma studies irrespective of whether the patient has an isolated injury or multiple injuries.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins</pub><pmid>34746659</pmid><doi>10.1097/OI9.0000000000000126</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2574-2167
ispartof OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma, 2021-06, Vol.4 (2), p.e126-e126
issn 2574-2167
2574-2167
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8568436
source DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects Clinical/Basic Science
title Comparing the responsiveness of a generic and a musculoskeletal specific functional outcome measure in orthopaedic patients with operative fixation of pelvic ring, acetabulum, or tibia fractures: a comparison between single injury and multiply injured patients
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-29T19%3A47%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparing%20the%20responsiveness%20of%20a%20generic%20and%20a%20musculoskeletal%20specific%20functional%20outcome%20measure%20in%20orthopaedic%20patients%20with%20operative%20fixation%20of%20pelvic%20ring,%20acetabulum,%20or%20tibia%20fractures:%20a%20comparison%20between%20single%20injury%20and%20multiply%20injured%20patients&rft.jtitle=OTA%20international%20:%20the%20open%20access%20journal%20of%20orthopaedic%20trauma&rft.au=Sepehri,%20Aresh&rft.date=2021-06&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=e126&rft.epage=e126&rft.pages=e126-e126&rft.issn=2574-2167&rft.eissn=2574-2167&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/OI9.0000000000000126&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2595105707%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2595105707&rft_id=info:pmid/34746659&rfr_iscdi=true