Elizabeth M Bergman, Edward P Mulligan, Rupal M Patel, Joel Wells
{"title":"单一评估数字评价和髋关节特异性患者报告结果测量的并发有效性。","authors":"Elizabeth M Bergman, Edward P Mulligan, Rupal M Patel, Joel Wells","doi":"10.1302/2633-1462.510.BJO-2024-0094.R1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The Single Assessment Numerical Evalution (SANE) score is a pragmatic alternative to longer patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The purpose of this study was to investigate the concurrent validity of the SANE and hip-specific PROMs in a generalized population of patients with hip pain at a single timepoint upon initial visit with an orthopaedic surgeon who is a hip preservation specialist. We hypothesized that SANE would have a strong correlation with the 12-question International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT)-12, the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), and the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), providing evidence for concurrent validity of the SANE and hip-specific outcome measures in patients with hip pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was a cross-sectional retrospective database analysis at a single timepoint. Data were collected from 2,782 patients at initial evaluation with a hip preservation specialist using the iHOT-12, HOS, HOOS, and SANE. Outcome scores were retrospectively analyzed using Pearson correlation coefficients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean raw scores were iHOT-12 67.01 (SD 29.52), HOS 58.42 (SD 26.26), HOOS 86.85 (SD 32.94), and SANE 49.60 (SD 27.92). SANE was moderately correlated with the iHOT-12 (<i>r</i> = -0.4; 95% CI -0.35 to -0.44; p < 0.001), HOS (<i>r</i> = 0.57; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.60; p < 0.001), and HOOS (<i>r</i> = -0.55; 95% CI -0.51 to -0.58; p < 0.001). The iHOT-12 and HOOS were recorded as a lower score, indicating better function, which accounts for the negative r values.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study was the first to investigate the relationship between the SANE and the iHOT-12, HOS, and HOOS in a population of patients with hip pain at the initial evaluation with an orthopaedic surgeon, and found moderate correlation between SANE and the iHOT-12, HOS, and HOOS. The SANE may be a pragmatic alternative for clinical benchmarking in a general population of patients with hip pain. The construct validity of the SANE should be questioned compared to legacy measures whose content validity has been more rigorously investigated.</p>","PeriodicalId":34103,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Open","volume":"5 10","pages":"904-910"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11486539/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Concurrent validity of the Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation and hip-specific patient-reported outcome measures.\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth M Bergman, Edward P Mulligan, Rupal M Patel, Joel Wells\",\"doi\":\"10.1302/2633-1462.510.BJO-2024-0094.R1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>The Single Assessment Numerical Evalution (SANE) score is a pragmatic alternative to longer patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The purpose of this study was to investigate the concurrent validity of the SANE and hip-specific PROMs in a generalized population of patients with hip pain at a single timepoint upon initial visit with an orthopaedic surgeon who is a hip preservation specialist. We hypothesized that SANE would have a strong correlation with the 12-question International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT)-12, the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), and the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), providing evidence for concurrent validity of the SANE and hip-specific outcome measures in patients with hip pain.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study was a cross-sectional retrospective database analysis at a single timepoint. Data were collected from 2,782 patients at initial evaluation with a hip preservation specialist using the iHOT-12, HOS, HOOS, and SANE. Outcome scores were retrospectively analyzed using Pearson correlation coefficients.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mean raw scores were iHOT-12 67.01 (SD 29.52), HOS 58.42 (SD 26.26), HOOS 86.85 (SD 32.94), and SANE 49.60 (SD 27.92). SANE was moderately correlated with the iHOT-12 (<i>r</i> = -0.4; 95% CI -0.35 to -0.44; p < 0.001), HOS (<i>r</i> = 0.57; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.60; p < 0.001), and HOOS (<i>r</i> = -0.55; 95% CI -0.51 to -0.58; p < 0.001). The iHOT-12 and HOOS were recorded as a lower score, indicating better function, which accounts for the negative r values.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study was the first to investigate the relationship between the SANE and the iHOT-12, HOS, and HOOS in a population of patients with hip pain at the initial evaluation with an orthopaedic surgeon, and found moderate correlation between SANE and the iHOT-12, HOS, and HOOS. The SANE may be a pragmatic alternative for clinical benchmarking in a general population of patients with hip pain. The construct validity of the SANE should be questioned compared to legacy measures whose content validity has been more rigorously investigated.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":34103,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bone & Joint Open\",\"volume\":\"5 10\",\"pages\":\"904-910\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11486539/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bone & Joint Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.510.BJO-2024-0094.R1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/2633-1462.510.BJO-2024-0094.R1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"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:单次评估数字评价(SANE)评分是一种实用的患者报告结果测量法(PROM)的替代方法。本研究的目的是在髋关节疼痛患者中调查 SANE 和髋关节特异性 PROMs 的并发有效性,调查对象是髋关节疼痛患者在初次就诊时的单一时间点。我们假设 SANE 与 12 个问题的国际髋关节结果工具 (iHOT)-12、髋关节结果评分 (HOS) 以及髋关节残疾和骨关节炎结果评分 (HOOS) 有很强的相关性,从而为髋关节疼痛患者的 SANE 和髋关节特异性结果测量的并发有效性提供证据:本研究是一项单一时间点的横断面回顾性数据库分析。研究收集了 2782 名患者的数据,这些患者在接受髋关节保护专家的初步评估时使用了 iHOT-12、HOS、HOOS 和 SANE。使用皮尔逊相关系数对结果评分进行回顾性分析:平均原始得分分别为:iHOT-12 67.01 (SD 29.52)、HOS 58.42 (SD 26.26)、HOOS 86.85 (SD 32.94)、SANE 49.60 (SD 27.92)。SANE 与 iHOT-12 (r = -0.4; 95% CI -0.35 to -0.44; p < 0.001)、HOS (r = 0.57; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.60; p < 0.001) 和 HOOS (r = -0.55; 95% CI -0.51 to -0.58; p < 0.001) 呈中度相关。iHOT-12和HOOS的得分越低,表明功能越好,这也是r值为负的原因:本研究首次调查了骨科医生对髋关节疼痛患者进行初步评估时 SANE 与 iHOT-12、HOS 和 HOOS 之间的关系,发现 SANE 与 iHOT-12、HOS 和 HOOS 之间存在适度的相关性。SANE 可能是髋关节疼痛患者临床基准的一种实用替代方法。与传统的测量方法相比,SANE 的构造效度应该受到质疑,因为传统测量方法的内容效度已经过更严格的研究。
Concurrent validity of the Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation and hip-specific patient-reported outcome measures.
Aims: The Single Assessment Numerical Evalution (SANE) score is a pragmatic alternative to longer patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The purpose of this study was to investigate the concurrent validity of the SANE and hip-specific PROMs in a generalized population of patients with hip pain at a single timepoint upon initial visit with an orthopaedic surgeon who is a hip preservation specialist. We hypothesized that SANE would have a strong correlation with the 12-question International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT)-12, the Hip Outcome Score (HOS), and the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), providing evidence for concurrent validity of the SANE and hip-specific outcome measures in patients with hip pain.
Methods: This study was a cross-sectional retrospective database analysis at a single timepoint. Data were collected from 2,782 patients at initial evaluation with a hip preservation specialist using the iHOT-12, HOS, HOOS, and SANE. Outcome scores were retrospectively analyzed using Pearson correlation coefficients.
Results: Mean raw scores were iHOT-12 67.01 (SD 29.52), HOS 58.42 (SD 26.26), HOOS 86.85 (SD 32.94), and SANE 49.60 (SD 27.92). SANE was moderately correlated with the iHOT-12 (r = -0.4; 95% CI -0.35 to -0.44; p < 0.001), HOS (r = 0.57; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.60; p < 0.001), and HOOS (r = -0.55; 95% CI -0.51 to -0.58; p < 0.001). The iHOT-12 and HOOS were recorded as a lower score, indicating better function, which accounts for the negative r values.
Conclusion: This study was the first to investigate the relationship between the SANE and the iHOT-12, HOS, and HOOS in a population of patients with hip pain at the initial evaluation with an orthopaedic surgeon, and found moderate correlation between SANE and the iHOT-12, HOS, and HOOS. The SANE may be a pragmatic alternative for clinical benchmarking in a general population of patients with hip pain. The construct validity of the SANE should be questioned compared to legacy measures whose content validity has been more rigorously investigated.