Correlation of the squat-and-smile test against other patient-reported outcome scores in knee pathology

J. Roux, R. Dey, A. Deichl, Oscar Torney, M. Laubscher, S. Graham, M. Held
{"title":"Correlation of the squat-and-smile test against other patient-reported outcome scores in knee pathology","authors":"J. Roux, R. Dey, A. Deichl, Oscar Torney, M. Laubscher, S. Graham, M. Held","doi":"10.17159/2309-8309/2021/v20n3a4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for knee pathology may be affected by socioeconomic factors, language barriers and time constraints in busy outpatient clinics. The squat-and-smile test (SST) is an example of such a test that has previously been validated for femur fractures. The aim of this study was to validate the SST against other PROMs in patients with knee pathology METHODS: Patients presenting to a subspecialist knee clinic in a large hospital in sub-Saharan Africa were approached to participate. They were asked to squat and the depth of the squat as well as the need to support themselves were classified into four categories. To describe their pain, participants also selected one of three smiley faces (unhappy, neutral, smiling). These test scores were correlated to the patient's Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Tegner Lysholm score and EQ-5D scores RESULTS: Seventy patients (median age 53.4 years) were included. The squat depth correlated moderately with the KOOS score (r=0.56) and poorly with the EQ-5D and Lysholm scores (r=0.46; r=0.43). The need for squat support had poor correlations with the KOOS, EQ-5D and Lysholm scores (r=0.29; r=0.31; r=0.31), as did the smiley face component (r=0.40; r=0.32; r=0.30 CONCLUSION: For patients with knee pathology, the squat depth correlates moderately with other PROMs. It could therefore be used in settings for which conventional PROMs have limited application. Support needed to squat, and a visual analogue scale of smiley faces, had poor correlation when compared to other knee PROMs and should not be used for the assessment of knee pathology Level of evidence: Level 4 Keywords: squat and smile, KOOS, PROM, smiley faces, outcome score","PeriodicalId":32220,"journal":{"name":"SA Orthopaedic Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SA Orthopaedic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2309-8309/2021/v20n3a4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: The use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for knee pathology may be affected by socioeconomic factors, language barriers and time constraints in busy outpatient clinics. The squat-and-smile test (SST) is an example of such a test that has previously been validated for femur fractures. The aim of this study was to validate the SST against other PROMs in patients with knee pathology METHODS: Patients presenting to a subspecialist knee clinic in a large hospital in sub-Saharan Africa were approached to participate. They were asked to squat and the depth of the squat as well as the need to support themselves were classified into four categories. To describe their pain, participants also selected one of three smiley faces (unhappy, neutral, smiling). These test scores were correlated to the patient's Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Tegner Lysholm score and EQ-5D scores RESULTS: Seventy patients (median age 53.4 years) were included. The squat depth correlated moderately with the KOOS score (r=0.56) and poorly with the EQ-5D and Lysholm scores (r=0.46; r=0.43). The need for squat support had poor correlations with the KOOS, EQ-5D and Lysholm scores (r=0.29; r=0.31; r=0.31), as did the smiley face component (r=0.40; r=0.32; r=0.30 CONCLUSION: For patients with knee pathology, the squat depth correlates moderately with other PROMs. It could therefore be used in settings for which conventional PROMs have limited application. Support needed to squat, and a visual analogue scale of smiley faces, had poor correlation when compared to other knee PROMs and should not be used for the assessment of knee pathology Level of evidence: Level 4 Keywords: squat and smile, KOOS, PROM, smiley faces, outcome score
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
膝关节病理学中深蹲和微笑测试与其他患者报告的结果评分的相关性
摘要背景:在繁忙的门诊诊所,使用患者报告的结果测量(PROM)进行膝关节病理检查可能受到社会经济因素、语言障碍和时间限制的影响。深蹲微笑测试(SST)就是这样一个测试的例子,该测试之前已被验证用于股骨骨折。本研究的目的是验证SST与其他PROM在膝关节病理患者中的作用。方法:邀请撒哈拉以南非洲一家大型医院的膝关节亚专科诊所就诊的患者参与。他们被要求蹲下,蹲下的深度以及支撑自己的需要被分为四类。为了描述他们的痛苦,参与者还从三个笑脸中选择了一个(不开心、中性、微笑)。这些测试分数与患者的膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结果分数(KOOS)、Tegner-Lysholm分数和EQ-5D分数相关。结果:包括70名患者(中位年龄53.4岁)。深蹲深度与KOOS评分相关性中等(r=0.56),与EQ-5D和Lysholm评分相关性较差(r=0.46;r=0.43)。深蹲支撑需求与KOOS、EQ-5D、Lysholm得分相关性较差(r=0.29;r=0.31;r=0.31),笑脸组件也是如此(r=0.40;r=0.32;r=0.30结论:对于膝关节病变患者,深蹲深度与其他PROM适度相关。因此,它可以用于传统PROM应用有限的环境。与其他膝关节PROM相比,深蹲所需的支持和笑脸的视觉模拟量表相关性较差,不应用于评估膝关节路径logy证据水平:4级关键词:蹲着微笑、KOOS、PROM、笑脸、结果得分
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
SA Orthopaedic Journal
SA Orthopaedic Journal Medicine-Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Fassier technique for correction of proximal femoral deformity in children with osteogenesis imperfecta Factors associated with dissemination and complications of acute bone and joint infections in children Low dislocation rate one year after total hip arthroplasty at a tertiary hospital in South Africa Functional outcome of free fibula grafting in benign non-reconstructable bone tumours involving the hand A survey on the educational value of an mHealth referral app for orthopaedics in South Africa
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1