更好或更坏的全球变化评级--髌骨股骨疼痛患者对自己的变化进行评级意味着什么?

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.2519/jospt.2024.12120
Gabriela S de Vasconcelos, Alessandro Andreucci, Bill Vicenzino, Kristian Thorborg, Mette Mikkelsen, Fábio Viadanna Serrão, Michael Skovdal Rathleff
{"title":"更好或更坏的全球变化评级--髌骨股骨疼痛患者对自己的变化进行评级意味着什么?","authors":"Gabriela S de Vasconcelos, Alessandro Andreucci, Bill Vicenzino, Kristian Thorborg, Mette Mikkelsen, Fábio Viadanna Serrão, Michael Skovdal Rathleff","doi":"10.2519/jospt.2024.12120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>OBJECTIVE:</b> To investigate how a global rating of change (GROC) score corresponds to change in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales in people with patellofemoral pain (PFP). <b>DESIGN:</b> Secondary analysis of data from 3 clinical trials. <b>METHODS:</b> Four hundred ninety adolescents (10-18 years old) and adults (19-40 years old) with PFP completed KOOS (5 subscales, 0-100) at baseline and 3-month follow-up as well as GROC at 3-month follow-up. GROC category descriptors were mapped to 5 categories: worse, no change, a bit better, better, and much better. Gaussian approximation was then used to calculate the change in KOOS scores for each GROC category. <b>RESULTS:</b> Due to overlap between KOOS scores in \"no change\" and \"a bit better,\" all analyses were performed on 4 categories. For all KOOS subscales, patients who reported being \"worse\" had negative KOOS scale change scores (≤ -2); patients reporting \"no change\" had KOOS scale change scores that ranged from -5 to 14; and patients feeling \"better\" or \"much better\" had positive KOOS scale change scores that ranged from 4 to 26 and ≥16, respectively. <b>CONCLUSION:</b> When patients with PFP reported feeling \"worse,\" \"better,\" or \"much better,\" there was a small-to-substantial change across the different KOOS scales. This is in contrast to no difference between reporting \"a bit better\" or \"no change\" in KOOS. When patients say they feel a little better, clinicians should be less confident about whether change has truly occurred. <i>J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(10):657-671. Epub 25 July 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12120</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":50099,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy","volume":"54 10","pages":"657-671"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Global Rating of Change for Better or Worse-What Does It Mean When Patients Who Are Treated for Patellofemoral Pain Rate Their Change?\",\"authors\":\"Gabriela S de Vasconcelos, Alessandro Andreucci, Bill Vicenzino, Kristian Thorborg, Mette Mikkelsen, Fábio Viadanna Serrão, Michael Skovdal Rathleff\",\"doi\":\"10.2519/jospt.2024.12120\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>OBJECTIVE:</b> To investigate how a global rating of change (GROC) score corresponds to change in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales in people with patellofemoral pain (PFP). <b>DESIGN:</b> Secondary analysis of data from 3 clinical trials. <b>METHODS:</b> Four hundred ninety adolescents (10-18 years old) and adults (19-40 years old) with PFP completed KOOS (5 subscales, 0-100) at baseline and 3-month follow-up as well as GROC at 3-month follow-up. GROC category descriptors were mapped to 5 categories: worse, no change, a bit better, better, and much better. Gaussian approximation was then used to calculate the change in KOOS scores for each GROC category. <b>RESULTS:</b> Due to overlap between KOOS scores in \\\"no change\\\" and \\\"a bit better,\\\" all analyses were performed on 4 categories. For all KOOS subscales, patients who reported being \\\"worse\\\" had negative KOOS scale change scores (≤ -2); patients reporting \\\"no change\\\" had KOOS scale change scores that ranged from -5 to 14; and patients feeling \\\"better\\\" or \\\"much better\\\" had positive KOOS scale change scores that ranged from 4 to 26 and ≥16, respectively. <b>CONCLUSION:</b> When patients with PFP reported feeling \\\"worse,\\\" \\\"better,\\\" or \\\"much better,\\\" there was a small-to-substantial change across the different KOOS scales. This is in contrast to no difference between reporting \\\"a bit better\\\" or \\\"no change\\\" in KOOS. When patients say they feel a little better, clinicians should be less confident about whether change has truly occurred. <i>J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(10):657-671. Epub 25 July 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12120</i>.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50099,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy\",\"volume\":\"54 10\",\"pages\":\"657-671\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2024.12120\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2024.12120","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:研究整体变化评分 (GROC) 与膝关节损伤和骨关节炎结果评分 (KOOS) 子量表的变化在髌股关节疼痛 (PFP) 患者中的对应关系。设计:对 3 项临床试验的数据进行二次分析。方法:490 名患有髌骨关节炎的青少年(10-18 岁)和成人(19-40 岁)在基线和 3 个月随访时填写 KOOS(5 个分量表,0-100 分),并在 3 个月随访时填写 GROC。GROC 类别描述符被映射为 5 个类别:更差、无变化、稍好、更好和好得多。然后使用高斯近似法计算每个 GROC 类别的 KOOS 评分变化。结果:由于 "无变化 "和 "稍好 "的 KOOS 分数之间存在重叠,因此所有分析均针对 4 个类别进行。在所有 KOOS 分量表中,报告 "更糟 "的患者的 KOOS 量表变化分值为负数(≤-2);报告 "无变化 "的患者的 KOOS 量表变化分值为-5 至 14 分;感觉 "更好 "或 "好很多 "的患者的 KOOS 量表变化分值为正数,分别为 4 至 26 分和≥16 分。结论:当 PFP 患者报告感觉 "更糟"、"更好 "或 "好多了 "时,不同的 KOOS 量表都会出现小到实质性的变化。与此形成鲜明对比的是,KOOS 的 "稍好 "或 "无变化 "与 "稍好 "之间没有差异。当患者说他们感觉好了一点时,临床医生应该对是否真的发生了变化缺乏信心。J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(10):657-671.doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12120。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Global Rating of Change for Better or Worse-What Does It Mean When Patients Who Are Treated for Patellofemoral Pain Rate Their Change?

OBJECTIVE: To investigate how a global rating of change (GROC) score corresponds to change in Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscales in people with patellofemoral pain (PFP). DESIGN: Secondary analysis of data from 3 clinical trials. METHODS: Four hundred ninety adolescents (10-18 years old) and adults (19-40 years old) with PFP completed KOOS (5 subscales, 0-100) at baseline and 3-month follow-up as well as GROC at 3-month follow-up. GROC category descriptors were mapped to 5 categories: worse, no change, a bit better, better, and much better. Gaussian approximation was then used to calculate the change in KOOS scores for each GROC category. RESULTS: Due to overlap between KOOS scores in "no change" and "a bit better," all analyses were performed on 4 categories. For all KOOS subscales, patients who reported being "worse" had negative KOOS scale change scores (≤ -2); patients reporting "no change" had KOOS scale change scores that ranged from -5 to 14; and patients feeling "better" or "much better" had positive KOOS scale change scores that ranged from 4 to 26 and ≥16, respectively. CONCLUSION: When patients with PFP reported feeling "worse," "better," or "much better," there was a small-to-substantial change across the different KOOS scales. This is in contrast to no difference between reporting "a bit better" or "no change" in KOOS. When patients say they feel a little better, clinicians should be less confident about whether change has truly occurred. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2024;54(10):657-671. Epub 25 July 2024. doi:10.2519/jospt.2024.12120.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
4.90%
发文量
101
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy® (JOSPT®) publishes scientifically rigorous, clinically relevant content for physical therapists and others in the health care community to advance musculoskeletal and sports-related practice globally. To this end, JOSPT features the latest evidence-based research and clinical cases in musculoskeletal health, injury, and rehabilitation, including physical therapy, orthopaedics, sports medicine, and biomechanics. With an impact factor of 3.090, JOSPT is among the highest ranked physical therapy journals in Clarivate Analytics''s Journal Citation Reports, Science Edition (2017). JOSPT stands eighth of 65 journals in the category of rehabilitation, twelfth of 77 journals in orthopedics, and fourteenth of 81 journals in sport sciences. JOSPT''s 5-year impact factor is 4.061.
期刊最新文献
Concussion Incidence by Type of Sport: Differences by Sex, Age Groups, Type of Session, and Level of Play An Overview of Systematic Reviews With Meta-analysis. Differential Effects of Quadriceps and Hip Muscle Exercises for Patellofemoral Pain: A Secondary Effect Modifier Analysis of a Randomized Trial. Improvements in Forward Bending Are Related to Improvements in Pain and Disability During Cognitive Functional Therapy for People With Chronic Low Back Pain. The Influence of "Labels" for Neck Pain on Recovery Expectations Following a Motor Vehicle Crash: An Online-Randomized Vignette-Based Experiment. Encouraging New Moms to Move More-Are We Missing the Mark? A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Exercise Interventions on Postpartum Physical Activity Levels and Cardiorespiratory Fitness.
×
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