ePoster #1206 - ISHA Annual Scientific Meeting 2016
Clinimetric Data On Patient Reported Outcomes For Hip Preservation Surgery: Review Of The Literature
David E. Hartigan, MD, Westmont, IL UNITED STATES
Itay Perets, MD, Westmont, IL UNITED STATES
Richard Kang, MD, Chicago, IL UNITED STATES
Mary R. Close, BS, Westmont, IL UNITED STATES
John P. Walsh, MA, Westmont, IL UNITED STATES
Lyall Ashberg, MD, Westmont, IL UNITED STATES
Benjamin G. Domb, MD, Chicago, IL UNITED STATES
American Hip Institute, Westmont, IL, UNITED STATES
FDA Status Not Applicable
Summary: Upon performing a systematic review of the patient reported outcomes to determine which have the most clinimetric support for use with hip preservation patients, the iHOT-33 demonstrated adequate clinimetric evidence for use in isolation, WOMAC had insufficient clinimetric support for use in this population, and the remaining PROs should be used in combination with one another.
Purpose: To demonstrate which patient reported outcomes (PROs) have the most clinimetric support for use in patients undergoing hip preservation surgery.
Methods: Two literature searches were conducted from 1980 to 2015. Both searches encompassed the PubMed, Medline (via ovid), CINAHL, and Embase databases. Search (i): the search terms utilized were FAI or labral tear or labrum tear or dysplasia and hip. The purpose of this search was to locate PROs utilized frequently in the hip preservation literature. In search (ii) the same databases were searched for all clinimetric and psychometric data on PROs recorded from search (i). These studies were then reviewed with the use of quality criteria proposed for measurement of health status questionnaires to demonstrate and report the clinimetric strength of each PRO.
Results: The first literature search identified 3,618 studies that found a PRO used to score outcomes of hip preservation surgery. After applying inclusion/exclusion criteria 48 studies were located in which ten different PROs were found that evaluated the results of hip preservation surgery. Of these ten PROs there were clinimetric or psychometric data on iHOT 33, HOS ADL, HOS SSS, mHHS, WOMAC, and Oxford hip scores. Three studies concluded that iHOT-33 had adequate construct validity, responsiveness, reliability, floor and ceiling effect, interpretability, internal consistency, and content validity. The remaining PROs were shown to have various clinimetric shortcomings.
Conclusion: The iHOT-33 demonstrated adequate clinimetric evidence for use in isolation. The WOMAC had insufficient clinimetric support for use in patients undergoing hip preservation surgery. The remaining PROs should be used in combination with one another in order to guard against any clinimetric deficiencies demonstrated in this review.