Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 4/2023

09-01-2023 | Osteoarthrosis | KNEE

KOOS score maps were externally validated to inform knee arthroplasty shared decision making

Author: Daniel L. Riddle

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 4/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Survey (KOOS) profile of outcome measures are among the most commonly used outcome measures in knee arthroplasty (KA). The purpose was to develop and externally validate “score maps” (one-page figural depictions of most likely scores) for KOOS Pain and Function subscales to facilitate a variety of clinical decisions related to shared decision making prior to KA.

Methods

Presurgical KA data collected within 1 year of surgery and obtained in two independent studies were used in this cross-sectional study. Score maps were designed to be easily understandable, single-page graphical depictions of predicted KOOS Pain, and KOOS Function, daily activity subscales. To create the score maps, individual item scores from one dataset were used to determine the most probable responses for each item for the entire range of possible scores. Predicted KOOS score maps were derived from Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) data and externally validated using an independent single site KA cohort study. Score map predicted scores from OAI were compared to actual presurgical KOOS subscale scores using Weighted Kappa (Κw) agreement coefficients and actual versus predicted differences in scores.

Results

The score maps derived from OAI and applied to actual scores in the validation sample demonstrated moderate to substantial chance-corrected agreement for both KOOS Pain and KOOS Function, daily activity subscale items. For example, KOOS Pain score map scores applied to the external validation dataset showed chance-corrected agreement with Κw ranging from 0.43 to 0.73. Score maps predicted actual item scores within ± 1 point at least 94% of the time. Findings for the KOOS Function, daily activity subscale items were similar.

Conclusions

Score maps derived from OAI data agreed with actual KOOS scores obtained on an independent dataset at an acceptable degree of precision. Easy-to-use KOOS Pain and Function, daily activity score maps have potential to facilitate a variety of important clinical decisions during discussions between patients and surgeons prior to KA.

Level of evidence

Level III prognostic study.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Alshehri F, Alarabi A, Alharthi M, Alanazi T, Alohali A, Alsaleem M (2020) Use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) by orthopedic surgeons in Saudi Arabia. J Orthop Surg Res 15:598CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
2.
Bellamy N, Buchanan WW (1986) A preliminary evaluation of the dimensionality and clinical importance of pain and disability in osteoarthritis of the hip and knee. Clin Rheumatol 5:231–241CrossRefPubMed
3.
Bujang MA, Baharum N (2017) Guidelines of the minimum sample size requirements for Cohen’s Kappa. Epidemiol Biostat Public Health 14(2):e12267–e12271
4.
Collins NJ, Misra D, Felson DT, Crossley KM, Roos EM (2011) Measures of knee function: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Short Form (KOOS-PS), Knee Outcome Survey Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADL) Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Oxford Knee Score (OKS) Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC, Activity Rating Scale (ARS) and Tegner Activity Score (TAS). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 63 Suppl 1:S208–S228
5.
Collins NJ, Prinsen CA, Christensen R, Bartels EM, Terwee CB, Roos EM (2016) Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): systematic review and meta-analysis of measurement properties. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 24:1317–1329CrossRefPubMed
6.
Collins NJ, Roos EM (2012) Patient-reported outcomes for total hip and knee arthroplasty: commonly used instruments and attributes of a “good” measure. Clin Geriatr Med 28:367–394CrossRefPubMed
7.
Dumenci L, Perera R, Keefe F, Ang D, Slover J, Jensen M, Riddle D (2019) Model-based pain and function outcome trajectory types for patients undergoing knee arthroplasty: a secondary analysis from a randomized clinical trial. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 27:878–884CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Frankel L, Sanmartin C, Hawker G, De CC, Dunbar M, Bohm E, Noseworthy T (2016) Perspectives of orthopaedic surgeons on patients’ appropriateness for total joint arthroplasty: a qualitative study. J Eval Clin Pract 22:164–170CrossRefPubMed
9.
Hafkamp FJ, Gosens T, de Vries J, den Oudsten BL (2020) Do dissatisfied patients have unrealistic expectations? a systematic review and best-evidence synthesis in knee and hip arthroplasty patients. EFORT Open Rev 5:226–240CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Jette AM, Tao W, Norweg A, Haley S (2007) Interpreting rehabilitation outcome measurements. J Rehabil Med 39:585–590CrossRefPubMed
11.
Juhl C, Lund H, Roos EM, Zhang W, Christensen R (2012) A hierarchy of patient-reported outcomes for meta-analysis of knee osteoarthritis Trials: empirical evidence from a survey of high impact journals. Arthritis 2012(1):17
12.
Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefPubMed
13.
14.
Lingard EA, Katz JN, Wright EA, Sledge CB (2004) Predicting the outcome of total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86(10):2179–2186CrossRefPubMed
15.
Mou D, Sisodia RC, Castillo-Angeles M, Ladin K, Bergmark RW, Pusic AL, del Carmen MG, Heng M (2022) The surgeon’s perceived value of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Ann Surg 275:500–505CrossRefPubMed
16.
Nilsdotter AK, Toksvig-Larsen S, Roos EM (2009) A 5 year prospective study of patient-relevant outcomes after total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 17:601–606CrossRefPubMed
17.
Patten RK, Tacey A, Bourke M, Lane R, Woessner MN, Levinger I (2022) The impact of waiting time for orthopaedic consultation on pain levels in individuals with osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage In Press
18.
Rastogi R, Davis AM, Chesworth BM (2007) A cross-sectional look at patient concerns in the first six weeks following primary total knee arthroplasty. Health Qual Life Outcomes 5:48CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Reeve BB, Hays RD, Bjorner JB, Cook KF, Crane PK, Teresi JA, Thissen D, Revicki DA, Weiss DJ, Hambleton RK, Liu H, Gershon R, Reise SP, Lai JS, Cella D (2007) Psychometric evaluation and calibration of health-related quality of life item banks: plans for the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS). Med Care 45:522–531CrossRef
20.
Riddle DL (2018) Prevalence and predictors of symptom resolution and functional restoration in the index knee after knee arthroplasty: a longitudinal study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 99(5):887–892CrossRefPubMed
21.
Riddle DL, Macfarlane GJ, Hamilton DF, Beasley M, Dumenci L (2022) Cross-validation of good versus poor self-reported outcome trajectory types following knee arthroplasty. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 30:61–68CrossRefPubMed
22.
Riddle DL, Perera RA, Jiranek WA, Dumenci L (2015) Using surgical appropriateness criteria to examine outcomes of total knee arthroplasty in a United States sample. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 67:349–357CrossRefPubMed
23.
Riddle DL, Sando T, Tarver T, Slover J, Sierra RJ, Brito JP, Montori VM (2021) Shared decision-making applied to knee arthroplasty: a systematic review of randomized trials. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 73:1125–1133CrossRefPubMed
24.
Roos EM, Lohmander LS (2003) The knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS): from joint injury to osteoarthritis. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:64CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
25.
Roos EM, Toksvig-Larsen S (2003) Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) - validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:17CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
26.
27.
Sayah SM, Karunaratne S, Beckenkamp PR, Horsley M, Hancock MJ, Hunter DJ, Herbert RD, de Campos TF, Steffens D (2021) Clinical course of pain and function following total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-regression. J Arthroplasty 36:3993–4002CrossRefPubMed
28.
Sim J, Wright CC (2005) The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. PhysTher 85:257–268
29.
Wang YC, Hart DL, Stratford PW, Mioduski JE (2009) Clinical interpretation of computerized adaptive test-generated outcome measures in patients with knee impairments. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 90:1340–1348CrossRefPubMed
30.
Wang YC, Hart DL, Werneke M, Stratford PW, Mioduski JE (2010) Clinical interpretation of outcome measures generated from a lumbar computerized adaptive test. Phys Ther 90:1323–1335CrossRefPubMed
31.
Whitebird RR, Solberg LI, Ziegenfuss JY, Norton CK, Chrenka EA, Swiontkowski M, Reams M, Grossman ES (2022) What do orthopaedists believe is needed for incorporating patient-reported outcome measures into clinical care? a qualitative study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 480:680–687CrossRefPubMed
32.
Ziegenfuss JY, Grossman ES, Solberg LI, Chrenka EA, Werner A, Asche SE, Norton CK, Nelson A, Reams M, Whitebird RR (2022) Is the promise of proms being realized? implementation experience in a large orthopedic practice. Am J Med Qual 37:489–494CrossRefPubMed
33.
Zywiel MG, Mahomed A, Gandhi R, Perruccio A, v, Mahomed NN, (2013) Measuring expectations in orthopaedic surgery: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:3446–3456CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
KOOS score maps were externally validated to inform knee arthroplasty shared decision making
Author
Daniel L. Riddle
Publication date
09-01-2023
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 4/2023
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-023-07315-0

Other articles of this Issue 4/2023

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy 4/2023 Go to the issue

KNEE

Work intensity and quality of life can be restored following double-level osteotomy in varus knee osteoarthritis

Editorial

Artificial intelligence bot ChatGPT in medical research: the potential game changer as a double-edged sword

KNEE

The impact of different alignment strategies on bone cuts for neutral knee phenotypes in total knee arthroplasty

KNEE

Closed-wedge high tibial osteotomy is more advantageous to maintain the correction than open-wedge high tibial osteotomy in osteopenic patients

KNEE

Combined treatment with medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction is effective on long-term follow-up

Knee

Inferior results at long-term follow-up after extensor mechanism allograft reconstruction in septic compared to aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty