Reliability and Validity of 6 Measures of XXXX , Function, and Disability for Ankle Arthroplasty and Arthrodesis.

@entity1 @entity571 @entity3681 @entity1746 @entity158 @entity10395
BACKGROUND: @entity1 -reported outcome measures are increasingly used evaluating clinical care. Many measures used to assess operative hindfoot interventions vary in content, and some have not been psychometrically validated in this population. The purpose of this study was to compare measurement properties of 6 @entity1746 @entity1 -reported outcome measures, and to evaluate their reliability and validity in light of @entity1 ' preferences. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of 42 preoperative and 100 postoperative @entity1 completed 6 @entity1746 outcome measures on 2 occasions: @entity10395 ( @entity10395 ), @entity3681 ( @entity3681 ), @entity1 -reported items of the @entity3681 ( @entity3681 ), Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities @entity571 Index (WOMAC), and the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA), as well as measures of preference, and symptoms. RESULTS: Internal consistency was good to excellent for all scales and subscales (a = .84-.97; ICC [2,1] = .81-.96). Correlations between scales ranged from .50 (WOMACStiffness and FFIActivity Limitations) to .92 (LEFS and SMFAOverall, WOMACPain and AOSOverall, FFIOverall and AOFASOverall). Higher correlations occurred within instruments (r = .97 AOSPain and AOSOverall) and between similar subscales from different instruments (r = .91 WOMACPain and AOSPain). Construct validity showed moderate to high correlations to global ratings of @entity158 , Stiffness, and difficulty performing Daily Activities. The highest correlations (r > .75) occurred between @entity158 and AOSOverall (r = .84), stiffness and WOMACStiffness (r = .81), and Daily Activities and AOSDisability (r = .87). @entity1 rated instruments by preference. @entity10395 , WOMAC, LEFS, and SMFA rated favorably for length. @entity10395 , WOMAC, LEFS, and @entity3681 rated high for understandability. @entity10395 was rated by postoperative @entity1 as most likely to capture change due to surgery. SMFA rated the best overall. CONCLUSIONS: Direct comparison of instruments revealed similarity between scales in construct validity and reliability. @entity1 preferences supported the use of these scales. Foot-specific instruments offered no clear advantage over @entity1746 instruments. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective comparative study.
