Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Arthritis Research & Therapy 4/2009

Open Access 01-08-2009 | Research article

A functional difficulty and functional pain instrument for hip and knee osteoarthritis

Authors: Alan M Jette, Christine M McDonough, Pengsheng Ni, Stephen M Haley, Ronald K Hambleton, Sippy Olarsch, David J Hunter, Young-jo Kim, David T Felson

Published in: Arthritis Research & Therapy | Issue 4/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

The objectives of this study were to develop a functional outcome instrument for hip and knee osteoarthritis research (OA-FUNCTION-CAT) using item response theory (IRT) and computer adaptive test (CAT) methods and to assess its psychometric performance compared to the current standard in the field.

Methods

We conducted an extensive literature review, focus groups, and cognitive testing to guide the construction of an item bank consisting of 125 functional activities commonly affected by hip and knee osteoarthritis. We recruited a convenience sample of 328 adults with confirmed hip and/or knee osteoarthritis. Subjects reported their degree of functional difficulty and functional pain in performing each activity in the item bank and completed the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). Confirmatory factor analyses were conducted to assess scale uni-dimensionality, and IRT methods were used to calibrate the items and examine the fit of the data. We assessed the performance of OA-FUNCTION-CATs of different lengths relative to the full item bank and WOMAC using CAT simulation analyses.

Results

Confirmatory factor analyses revealed distinct functional difficulty and functional pain domains. Descriptive statistics for scores from 5-, 10-, and 15-item CATs were similar to those for the full item bank. The 10-item OA-FUNCTION-CAT scales demonstrated a high degree of accuracy compared with the item bank (r = 0.96 and 0.89, respectively). Compared to the WOMAC, both scales covered a broader score range and demonstrated a higher degree of precision at the ceiling and reliability across the range of scores.

Conclusions

The OA-FUNCTION-CAT provided superior reliability throughout the score range and improved breadth and precision at the ceiling compared with the WOMAC. Further research is needed to assess whether these improvements carry over into superior ability to measure change.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Rat AC, Coste J, Pouchot J, Baumann M, Spitz E, Retel-Rude N, Le Quintrec JS, Dumont-Fischer D, Guillemin F: OAKHQOL: a new instrument to measure quality of life in knee and hip osteoarthritis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005, 58: 47-55. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.04.011.CrossRefPubMed Rat AC, Coste J, Pouchot J, Baumann M, Spitz E, Retel-Rude N, Le Quintrec JS, Dumont-Fischer D, Guillemin F: OAKHQOL: a new instrument to measure quality of life in knee and hip osteoarthritis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005, 58: 47-55. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.04.011.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Bellamy N, Bombardier C, Felson D, Hochberg M, Heijde van der D, Dougados M: Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005, 64: 29-33. 10.1136/ard.2004.022905.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Bellamy N, Bombardier C, Felson D, Hochberg M, Heijde van der D, Dougados M: Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005, 64: 29-33. 10.1136/ard.2004.022905.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Garratt AM, Brealey S, Gillespie WJ, DAMASK Trial Team: Patient-assessed health instruments for the knee: a structured review. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2004, 43: 1414-1423. 10.1093/rheumatology/keh362.CrossRef Garratt AM, Brealey S, Gillespie WJ, DAMASK Trial Team: Patient-assessed health instruments for the knee: a structured review. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2004, 43: 1414-1423. 10.1093/rheumatology/keh362.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Long JS, Pavalko E: Comparing alternative measures of functional limitation. Med Care. 2004, 42: 19-27. 10.1097/01.mlr.0000102293.37107.c5.CrossRefPubMed Long JS, Pavalko E: Comparing alternative measures of functional limitation. Med Care. 2004, 42: 19-27. 10.1097/01.mlr.0000102293.37107.c5.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Jette AM, Haley SM: Contemporary measurement techniques for rehabilitation outcomes assessment. J Rehabil Med. 2005, 37: 339-345. 10.1080/16501970500302793.CrossRefPubMed Jette AM, Haley SM: Contemporary measurement techniques for rehabilitation outcomes assessment. J Rehabil Med. 2005, 37: 339-345. 10.1080/16501970500302793.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference McHorney C: Generic health measurement: past accomplishments and a measurement paradigm for the 21st century. Ann Intern Med. 1997, 127: 743-750.CrossRefPubMed McHorney C: Generic health measurement: past accomplishments and a measurement paradigm for the 21st century. Ann Intern Med. 1997, 127: 743-750.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Ware JE: Conceptualization and measurement of health-related quality of life: comments on an evolving field. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003, 84: S43-51. 10.1053/apmr.2003.50246.CrossRefPubMed Ware JE: Conceptualization and measurement of health-related quality of life: comments on an evolving field. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003, 84: S43-51. 10.1053/apmr.2003.50246.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Beaton D, Richards R: Measuring function of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg. 1996, 78: 882-890.PubMed Beaton D, Richards R: Measuring function of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg. 1996, 78: 882-890.PubMed
10.
go back to reference Chen AT, Broadhead W, Doe E, Broyles W: Patient acceptance of two health status measures: The Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey and the Duke Health Profile. Fam Med. 1993, 25: 536-539.PubMed Chen AT, Broadhead W, Doe E, Broyles W: Patient acceptance of two health status measures: The Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey and the Duke Health Profile. Fam Med. 1993, 25: 536-539.PubMed
11.
go back to reference McHorney C, Bricker DJ: A qualitative study of patients' and physicians' views about practice-based functional health assessment. Med Care. 2002, 40: 1113-1125. 10.1097/00005650-200211000-00012.CrossRefPubMed McHorney C, Bricker DJ: A qualitative study of patients' and physicians' views about practice-based functional health assessment. Med Care. 2002, 40: 1113-1125. 10.1097/00005650-200211000-00012.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Rubenach S, Shadbolt B, McCallum J: Assessing health-related quality of life following myocardial infarction: is the SF-12 useful?. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002, 55: 306-309. 10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00426-7.CrossRefPubMed Rubenach S, Shadbolt B, McCallum J: Assessing health-related quality of life following myocardial infarction: is the SF-12 useful?. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002, 55: 306-309. 10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00426-7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Hambleton RK, Swaminathan H, Rogers HJ: Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. 1991, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications Hambleton RK, Swaminathan H, Rogers HJ: Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. 1991, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications
14.
go back to reference Lord FM: Applications of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems. 1990, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates Lord FM: Applications of Item Response Theory to Practical Testing Problems. 1990, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates
15.
go back to reference Linden van der WJ, Hambleton RK: Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. 1997, New York, NY: Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.CrossRef Linden van der WJ, Hambleton RK: Handbook of Modern Item Response Theory. 1997, New York, NY: Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Cella D, Gershon R, Lai JS, Choi S: The future of outcomes measurement: item banking, tailored short-forms, and computer adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res. 2007, 16: 133-141. 10.1007/s11136-007-9204-6.CrossRefPubMed Cella D, Gershon R, Lai JS, Choi S: The future of outcomes measurement: item banking, tailored short-forms, and computer adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res. 2007, 16: 133-141. 10.1007/s11136-007-9204-6.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Wainer H: Computer Adaptive Testing: A Primer. 2000, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlabaum Associates Wainer H: Computer Adaptive Testing: A Primer. 2000, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlabaum Associates
18.
go back to reference Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW: Validation of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988, 15: 1833-1840.PubMed Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW: Validation of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988, 15: 1833-1840.PubMed
19.
go back to reference Haley SM, Ni P, Hambleton R, Slavin M, Jette AM: Computer adaptive testing improved accuracy and precision of scores over random item selection in a physical functioning item bank. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006, 59: 1174-1182. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.02.010.CrossRefPubMed Haley SM, Ni P, Hambleton R, Slavin M, Jette AM: Computer adaptive testing improved accuracy and precision of scores over random item selection in a physical functioning item bank. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006, 59: 1174-1182. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.02.010.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Mislevy RJ: Recent developments in the factor analysis of categorical variables. Journal of Educational Statistics. 1986, 11: 3-31. 10.2307/1164846.CrossRef Mislevy RJ: Recent developments in the factor analysis of categorical variables. Journal of Educational Statistics. 1986, 11: 3-31. 10.2307/1164846.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Muthen B, Muthen L: MPlus User's Guide. 1998, Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen Muthen B, Muthen L: MPlus User's Guide. 1998, Los Angeles, CA: Muthen & Muthen
22.
go back to reference Beauducel A, Herzberg PY: On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling. 2006, 13: 186-203. 10.1207/s15328007sem1302_2.CrossRef Beauducel A, Herzberg PY: On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling. 2006, 13: 186-203. 10.1207/s15328007sem1302_2.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Anderson JC, Gerbing DW: The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indexes for maximum-likelihood confirmatory factor-analysis. Psychometrika. 1984, 49: 155-73. 10.1007/BF02294170.CrossRef Anderson JC, Gerbing DW: The effect of sampling error on convergence, improper solutions, and goodness-of-fit indexes for maximum-likelihood confirmatory factor-analysis. Psychometrika. 1984, 49: 155-73. 10.1007/BF02294170.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Bentler PM: On the fit of models to covariance and methodology. Psychol Bull. 1992, 112: 400-404. 10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.400.CrossRefPubMed Bentler PM: On the fit of models to covariance and methodology. Psychol Bull. 1992, 112: 400-404. 10.1037/0033-2909.112.3.400.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Marsh HW, Balla JR, McDonald RP: Goodness of fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: the effect of sample size. Psychol Bull. 1988, 103: 391-410. 10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.391.CrossRef Marsh HW, Balla JR, McDonald RP: Goodness of fit indexes in confirmatory factor analysis: the effect of sample size. Psychol Bull. 1988, 103: 391-410. 10.1037/0033-2909.103.3.391.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Browne MW, Cudeck R: Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Testing Structural Equation Models. Edited by: Bollen KA, Long JS. 1993, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 136-162. Browne MW, Cudeck R: Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Testing Structural Equation Models. Edited by: Bollen KA, Long JS. 1993, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 136-162.
27.
go back to reference Hu LT, Bentler PM: Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling. 1993, 6: 1-55.CrossRef Hu LT, Bentler PM: Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling. 1993, 6: 1-55.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Reeve BB, Hays RD, Bjorner JB: Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Med Care. 2007, 45: S22-31. 10.1097/01.mlr.0000250483.85507.04.CrossRefPubMed Reeve BB, Hays RD, Bjorner JB: Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS). Med Care. 2007, 45: S22-31. 10.1097/01.mlr.0000250483.85507.04.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Andrich D: Rasch Models for Measurement. 1998, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications Andrich D: Rasch Models for Measurement. 1998, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications
30.
go back to reference Fischer G, Molenaar I: Rasch Models: Foundations, Recent Developments, and Applications. 1995, Berlin, Germany: Springer-VerlagCrossRef Fischer G, Molenaar I: Rasch Models: Foundations, Recent Developments, and Applications. 1995, Berlin, Germany: Springer-VerlagCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Masters GN: A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika. 1982, 47: 147-174. 10.1007/BF02296272.CrossRef Masters GN: A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika. 1982, 47: 147-174. 10.1007/BF02296272.CrossRef
32.
go back to reference Bjorner JB, Chang CH, Thissen D, Reeve RB: Developing tailored instruments: item banking and computerized adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res. 2007, 16: 95-108. 10.1007/s11136-007-9168-6.CrossRefPubMed Bjorner JB, Chang CH, Thissen D, Reeve RB: Developing tailored instruments: item banking and computerized adaptive assessment. Qual Life Res. 2007, 16: 95-108. 10.1007/s11136-007-9168-6.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Warm TA: Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika. 1989, 54: 427-450. 10.1007/BF02294627.CrossRef Warm TA: Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika. 1989, 54: 427-450. 10.1007/BF02294627.CrossRef
34.
go back to reference Muraki E, Block RD: PARSCALE: IRT Item Analysis and Test Scoring for Rating – Scale Data. 1997, Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International Muraki E, Block RD: PARSCALE: IRT Item Analysis and Test Scoring for Rating – Scale Data. 1997, Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International
35.
go back to reference Hariharan S, Rogers HJ: Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement. 1990, 27: 361-370. 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1990.tb00754.x.CrossRef Hariharan S, Rogers HJ: Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement. 1990, 27: 361-370. 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1990.tb00754.x.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Jodoin M, Gierl M: Evaluating type I error and power rates using an effect size measure with the logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Applied Measurement in Education. 2001, 14: 329-349. 10.1207/S15324818AME1404_2.CrossRef Jodoin M, Gierl M: Evaluating type I error and power rates using an effect size measure with the logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Applied Measurement in Education. 2001, 14: 329-349. 10.1207/S15324818AME1404_2.CrossRef
37.
go back to reference Mâsse LC, Heesch KC, Eason KE, Wilson M: Evaluating the properties of a stage-specific self-efficacy scale for physical activity using classical test theory, confirmatory factor analysis and item response modeling. Health Educ Res. 2006, 21: i33-i46. 10.1093/her/cyl106.CrossRefPubMed Mâsse LC, Heesch KC, Eason KE, Wilson M: Evaluating the properties of a stage-specific self-efficacy scale for physical activity using classical test theory, confirmatory factor analysis and item response modeling. Health Educ Res. 2006, 21: i33-i46. 10.1093/her/cyl106.CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Ryser L, Wright BD, Aeschlimann A, Mariacher-Gehler S, Stucki G: A new look at the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Arthritis Care Res. 1999, 12: 331-335. 10.1002/1529-0131(199910)12:5<331::AID-ART4>3.0.CO;2-W.CrossRefPubMed Ryser L, Wright BD, Aeschlimann A, Mariacher-Gehler S, Stucki G: A new look at the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Arthritis Care Res. 1999, 12: 331-335. 10.1002/1529-0131(199910)12:5<331::AID-ART4>3.0.CO;2-W.CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Baker FB: Item Response Theory: Parameter Estimation Techniques. 1992, New York, NY: Marcel Dekker, Inc. Baker FB: Item Response Theory: Parameter Estimation Techniques. 1992, New York, NY: Marcel Dekker, Inc.
40.
go back to reference DeMars CE: Sample size and the recovery of nominal response model item parameters. Applied Psychological Measurement. 2003, 27: 275-288. 10.1177/0146621603027004003.CrossRef DeMars CE: Sample size and the recovery of nominal response model item parameters. Applied Psychological Measurement. 2003, 27: 275-288. 10.1177/0146621603027004003.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
A functional difficulty and functional pain instrument for hip and knee osteoarthritis
Authors
Alan M Jette
Christine M McDonough
Pengsheng Ni
Stephen M Haley
Ronald K Hambleton
Sippy Olarsch
David J Hunter
Young-jo Kim
David T Felson
Publication date
01-08-2009
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Arthritis Research & Therapy / Issue 4/2009
Electronic ISSN: 1478-6362
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/ar2760

Other articles of this Issue 4/2009

Arthritis Research & Therapy 4/2009 Go to the issue