liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Minimally important change, measurement error, and responsiveness for the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score
SUS Malmö, Sweden.
Sahlgrens University Hospital, Sweden.
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Kalmar Hospital, Sweden.
Lund University, Sweden; Halmstad University, Sweden.
2017 (English)In: Acta Orthopaedica, ISSN 1745-3674, E-ISSN 1745-3682, Vol. 88, no 3, 300-304 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background and purpose - Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to evaluate results in orthopedic surgery. To enhance good responsiveness with a PROM, the minimally important change (MIC) should be established. MIC reflects the smallest measured change in score that is perceived as being relevant by the patients. We assessed MIC for the Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) used in Swedish national registries. Patients and methods - Patients with forefoot disorders (n = 83) or hindfoot/ankle disorders (n = 80) completed the SEFAS before surgery and 6 months after surgery. At 6 months also, a patient global assessment (PGA) scaleas external criterionwas completed. Measurement error was expressed as the standard error of a single determination. MIC was calculated by (1) median change scores in improved patients on the PGA scale, and (2) the best cutoff point (BCP) and area under the curve (AUC) using analysis of receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs). Results - The change in mean summary score was the same, 9 (SD 9), in patients with forefoot disorders and in patients with hindfoot/ankle disorders. MIC for SEFAS in the total sample was 5 score points (IQR: 2-8) and the measurement error was 2.4. BCP was 5 and AUC was 0.8 (95% CI: 0.7-0.9). Interpretation - As previously shown, SEFAS has good responsiveness. The score change in SEFAS 6 months after surgery should exceed 5 score points in both forefoot patients and hindfoot/ankle patients to be considered as being clinically relevant.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD , 2017. Vol. 88, no 3, 300-304 p.
National Category
Surgery
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-137868DOI: 10.1080/17453674.2017.1293445ISI: 000400742500011PubMedID: 28464751OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-137868DiVA: diva2:1105033
Note

Funding Agencies|Research Council in Southeast Sweden (FORSS); Herman Jarnhardts Stiftelse; Swedish Foot and Ankle Society; Stiftelsen Skobranschens utvecklingsfond

Available from: 2017-06-02 Created: 2017-06-02 Last updated: 2017-06-28

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(609 kB)16 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 609 kBChecksum SHA-512
f540b71079f2e5e3cb259b0c56ea9af67d7f1efa9e9a54f7e7de9a948888a8a5b17323f968b7bc214ece062f289d783e6133de592d5ec512454551704ee0b39a
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Brudin, Lars
By organisation
Division of Cardiovascular MedicineFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
In the same journal
Acta Orthopaedica
Surgery

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 16 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 51 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf