TY - JOUR
T1 - Evaluation of shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures: A systematic and standardized comparison of available evidence
AU - Schmidt, Stefanie
AU - Ferrer, Montse
AU - González, Marta
AU - González, Nerea
AU - Valderas, José Maria
AU - Alonso, Jordi
AU - Escobar, Antonio
AU - Vrotsou, Kalliopi
AU - Jordi, Alonso
AU - Montse, Ferrer
AU - Stefanie, Schmidt
AU - Olatz, Garin
AU - Gemma, Vilagut
AU - Angels, Pont
AU - Yolanda, Pardo
AU - Gabriela, Barbaglia
AU - Pere, Castellvi
AU - Carlos, García Forero
AU - Ana, Redondo
AU - Virginia, Becerra
AU - Ester, Villalonga
AU - Mireya, Garcia Duran
AU - Sonia, Rojas
AU - Oriol, Cunillera
AU - José María, Ramada Rodilla
PY - 2014/3/1
Y1 - 2014/3/1
N2 - Background: The aim of this study was to perform a standardized and systematic evaluation of the available evidence on multi-item shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures that are applicable to a wide spectrum of disorders. Materials and methods: A systematic review was conducted in PubMed to identify articles with information regarding the development process, metric properties, and administration issues of shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures. Two experts independently reviewed all the articles identified for one instrument and applied the EMPRO (Evaluating Measures of Patient Reported Outcomes) tool, which was designed to assess the quality of attributes in a standardized way. An overall EMPRO score and 6 attribute-specific scores were calculated (range, 0-100) to describe the quality of instrument performance. Results: We identified 11 instruments and 112 articles (2-30 articles per instrument). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder assessment, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) were the best rated, with overall scores of 77.4 points, 72.6 points, and 69.7 points, respectively. They have been shown to be valid, reliable, and responsive, with a low administration burden. Acceptable results were also found for the Flexilevel Scale of Shoulder Function, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, and Dutch Shoulder Disability Questionnaire, but some of their attributes need further evaluation. Conclusions: Current evidence supports the use of the ASES, SST, or OSS. We recommend the SST for longitudinal studies or clinical trials, the Dutch Shoulder Disability Questionnaire for clinical practice to minimize administration burden, and the ASES or OSS to discriminate among patients' or groups' evaluations at one point of time. © 2014 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees.
AB - Background: The aim of this study was to perform a standardized and systematic evaluation of the available evidence on multi-item shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures that are applicable to a wide spectrum of disorders. Materials and methods: A systematic review was conducted in PubMed to identify articles with information regarding the development process, metric properties, and administration issues of shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures. Two experts independently reviewed all the articles identified for one instrument and applied the EMPRO (Evaluating Measures of Patient Reported Outcomes) tool, which was designed to assess the quality of attributes in a standardized way. An overall EMPRO score and 6 attribute-specific scores were calculated (range, 0-100) to describe the quality of instrument performance. Results: We identified 11 instruments and 112 articles (2-30 articles per instrument). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder assessment, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) were the best rated, with overall scores of 77.4 points, 72.6 points, and 69.7 points, respectively. They have been shown to be valid, reliable, and responsive, with a low administration burden. Acceptable results were also found for the Flexilevel Scale of Shoulder Function, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, and Dutch Shoulder Disability Questionnaire, but some of their attributes need further evaluation. Conclusions: Current evidence supports the use of the ASES, SST, or OSS. We recommend the SST for longitudinal studies or clinical trials, the Dutch Shoulder Disability Questionnaire for clinical practice to minimize administration burden, and the ASES or OSS to discriminate among patients' or groups' evaluations at one point of time. © 2014 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees.
KW - Disability evaluation
KW - Outcome assessment
KW - Psychometrics
KW - Quality of life
KW - Questionnaires
KW - Shoulder pain
KW - Systematic review
KW - Validation of outcome instruments
KW - Validation studies
U2 - 10.1016/j.jse.2013.09.029
DO - 10.1016/j.jse.2013.09.029
M3 - Article
SN - 1058-2746
VL - 23
SP - 434
EP - 444
JO - Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
JF - Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
IS - 3
ER -