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

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2010

Open Access 01-12-2010 | Research article

Reliability and concurrent validity of the Dutch hip and knee replacement expectations surveys

Authors: Inge van den Akker-Scheek, Jos JAM van Raay, Inge HF Reininga, Sjoerd K Bulstra, Wiebren Zijlstra, Martin Stevens

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Preoperative expectations of outcome of total hip and knee arthroplasty are important determinants of patients' satisfaction and functional outcome. Aims of the study were (1) to translate the Hospital for Special Surgery Hip Replacement Expectations Survey and Knee Replacement Expectations Survey into Dutch and (2) to study test-retest reliability and concurrent validity.

Methods

Patients scheduled for total hip (N = 112) or knee replacement (N = 101) were sent the Dutch Expectations Surveys twice with a 2 week interval to determine test-retest reliability. To determine concurrent validity, the Expectation WOMAC was sent.

Results

The results for the Dutch Hip Replacement Expectations Survey revealed good test-retest reliability (ICC 0.87), no bias and good internal consistency (alpha 0.86) (N = 72). The correlation between the Hip Expectations Score and the Expectation WOMAC score was 0.59 (N = 86). The results for the Dutch Knee Replacement Expectations Survey revealed good test-retest reliability (ICC 0.79), no bias and good internal consistency (alpha 0.91) (N = 46). The correlation with the Expectation WOMAC score was 0.52 (N = 57).

Conclusions

Both Dutch Expectations Surveys are reliable instruments to determine patients' expectations before total hip or knee arthroplasty. As for concurrent validity, the correlation between both surveys and the Expectation WOMAC was moderate confirming that the same construct was determined. However, patients scored systematically lower on the Expectation WOMAC compared to the Dutch Expectation Surveys. Research on patients' expectations before total hip and knee replacement has only been performed in a limited amount of countries. With the Dutch Expectations Surveys it is now possible to determine patients' expectations in another culture and healthcare setting.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Arden N, Nevitt MC: Osteoarthritis: epidemiology. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2006, 20: 3-25. 10.1016/j.berh.2005.09.007.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Mahomed NN, Liang MH, Cook EF, Daltroy LH, Fortin PR, Fossel AH, Katz JN: The importance of patient expectations in predicting functional outcomes after total joint arthroplasty. J Rheumatol. 2002, 29: 1273-1279.PubMed
3.
Mancuso CA, Salvati EA, Johanson NA, Peterson MG, Charlson ME: Patients' expectations and satisfaction with total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1997, 12: 387-396. 10.1016/S0883-5403(97)90194-7.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Noble PC, Conditt MA, Cook KF, Mathis KB: The John Insall Award: Patient expectations affect satisfaction with total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006, 452: 35-43. 10.1097/01.blo.0000238825.63648.1e.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Gandhi R, Davey JR, Mahomed N: Patient expectations predict greater pain relief with joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2009, 24: 716-721. 10.1016/j.arth.2008.05.016.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Mancuso CA, Jout J, Salvati EA, Sculco TP: Fulfillment of patients' expectations for total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009, 91: 2073-2078. 10.2106/JBJS.H.01802.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Iversen MD, Daltroy LH, Fossel AH, Katz JN: The prognostic importance of patient pre-operative expectations of surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis. Patient Educ Couns. 1998, 34: 169-178. 10.1016/S0738-3991(97)00109-2.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Lieberman JR, Dorey F, Shekelle P, Schumacher L, Thomas BJ, Kilgus DJ, Finerman GA: Differences between patients' and physicians' evaluations of outcome after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996, 78: 835-838.PubMed
9.
Moran M, Khan A, Sochart DH, Andrew G: Expect the best, prepare for the worst: surgeon and patient expectation of the outcome of primary total hip and knee replacement. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2003, 85: 204-206. 10.1308/003588403321661415.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
Mancuso CA, Sculco TP, Salvati EA: Patients with poor preoperative functional status have high expectations of total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2003, 18: 872-878. 10.1016/S0883-5403(03)00276-6.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Nilsdotter AK, Toksvig-Larsen S, Roos EM: Knee arthroplasty: are patients' expectations fulfilled? A prospective study of pain and function in 102 patients with 5-year follow-up. Acta Orthop. 2009, 80: 55-61. 10.1080/17453670902805007.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Rosenberger PH, Jokl P, Cameron A, Ickovics JR: Shared decision making, preoperative expectations, and postoperative reality: differences in physician and patient predictions and ratings of knee surgery outcomes. Arthroscopy. 2005, 21: 562-569. 10.1016/j.arthro.2005.02.022.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Mancuso CA, Graziano S, Briskie LM, Peterson MG, Pellicci PM, Salvati EA, Sculco TP: Randomized trials to modify patients' preoperative expectations of hip and knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008, 466: 424-431. 10.1007/s11999-007-0052-z.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
Thomas KM, Sethares KA: An investigation of the effects of preoperative interdisciplinary patient education on understanding postoperative expectations following a total joint arthroplasty. Orthop Nurs. 2008, 27: 374-381. 10.1097/01.NOR.0000342428.74830.67.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Mancuso CA, Sculco TP, Wickiewicz TL, Jones EC, Robbins L, Warren RF, Williams-Russo P: Patients' expectations of knee surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001, 83-A: 1005-1012.PubMed
16.
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB: Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000, 25: 3186-3191.CrossRef
17.
Haddad FS, Garbuz DS, Chambers GK, Jagpal TJ, Masri BA, Duncan CP: The expectations of patients undergoing revision hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2001, 16: 87-91. 10.1054/arth.2001.17937.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW: Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988, 15: 1833-1840.PubMed
19.
Roorda LD, Jones CA, Waltz M, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM, van der Eijken JW, Willems WJ, Heyligers IC, Voaklander DC, Kelly KD: Satisfactory cross cultural equivalence of the Dutch WOMAC in patients with hip osteoarthritis waiting for arthroplasty. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004, 63: 36-42. 10.1136/ard.2002.001784.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Shrout PE, Fleiss JL: Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979, 86: 420-428. 10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH: Psychometric theory. 1994, New York: McGraw-Hill
22.
Bland JM, Altman DG: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986, 1: 307-310.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Streiner DL, Norman GR: Health Measurement Scales. A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use. 1995, Oxford: Oxford University Press
24.
Lingard EA, Sledge CB, Learmonth ID: Patient expectations regarding total knee arthroplasty: differences among the United States, United kingdom, and Australia. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006, 88: 1201-1207. 10.2106/JBJS.E.00147.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Reliability and concurrent validity of the Dutch hip and knee replacement expectations surveys
Authors
Inge van den Akker-Scheek
Jos JAM van Raay
Inge HF Reininga
Sjoerd K Bulstra
Wiebren Zijlstra
Martin Stevens
Publication date
01-12-2010
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2010
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-11-242

Other articles of this Issue 1/2010

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2010 Go to the issue

Study protocol

Fluid Lavage of Open Wounds (FLOW): design and rationale for a large, multicenter collaborative 2 × 3 factorial trial of irrigating pressures and solutions in patients with open fractures

Study protocol

The cost-effectiveness of a treatment-based classification system for low back pain: design of a randomised controlled trial and economic evaluation

Study protocol

Non-pharmacological care for patients with generalized osteoarthritis: design of a randomized clinical trial

Research article

Bio-psychosocial determinants of time lost from work following non life threatening acute orthopaedic trauma

Study protocol

The GRONORUN 2 study: effectiveness of a preconditioning program on preventing running related injuries in novice runners. The design of a randomized controlled trial

Research article

Increased concentration of two different advanced glycation end-products detected by enzyme immunoassays with new monoclonal antibodies in sera of patients with rheumatoid arthritis