A1 Journal article (refereed)
Validity of five foot and ankle specific electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) instruments in patients undergoing elective orthopedic foot or ankle surgery (2021)
Uimonen, M. M., Ponkilainen, V. T., Toom, A., Miettinen, M., Häkkinen, A. H., Sandelin, H., Latvala, A. O., Sirola, T., Sampo, M., Roine, R. P., Lindahl, J., Ilves, O., Sandbacka, A., & Repo, J. P. (2021). Validity of five foot and ankle specific electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) instruments in patients undergoing elective orthopedic foot or ankle surgery. Foot and Ankle Surgery, 27(1), 52-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fas.2020.02.003
JYU authors or editors
Publication details
All authors or editors: Uimonen, Mikko M.; Ponkilainen, Ville T.; Toom, Alar; Miettinen, Mikko; Häkkinen, Arja H.; Sandelin, Henrik; Latvala, Antti O.; Sirola, Timo; Sampo, Mika; Roine, Risto P.; et al.
Journal or series: Foot and Ankle Surgery
ISSN: 1268-7731
eISSN: 1460-9584
Publication year: 2021
Volume: 27
Issue number: 1
Pages range: 52-59
Publisher: Elsevier
Publication country: United Kingdom
Publication language: English
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fas.2020.02.003
Publication open access: Not open
Publication channel open access:
Publication is parallel published (JYX): https://jyx.jyu.fi/handle/123456789/73573
Abstract
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are widely accepted measures for evaluating outcomes of surgical interventions. As patient-reported information is stored in electronic health records, it is essential that there are valid electronic PRO (ePRO) instruments available for clinicians and researchers. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of electronic versions of five widely used foot and ankle specific PRO instruments.
Methods
Altogether 111 consecutive elective foot/ankle surgery patients were invited face-to-face to participate in this study. Patients completed electronic versions of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM), the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), the modified Lower Extremity Function Scale (LEFS), the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ), and the Visual Analogue Scale Foot and Ankle (VAS-FA) on the day of elective foot and/or ankle surgery. Construct validity, coverage, and targeting of the scales were assessed.
Results
Based on general and predefined thresholds, construct validity, coverage, and targeting of the ePRO versions of the FAAM, the FAOS, the MOXFQ, and the VAS-FA were acceptable. Major issues arose with score distribution and convergent validity of the modified LEFS instrument.
Conclusions
The ePRO versions of the FAAM, the FAOS, the MOXFQ, and the VAS-FA provide valid scores for foot and ankle patients. However, our findings do not support the use of the modified LEFS as an electronic outcome measure for patients with orthopedic foot and/or ankle pathologies.
Keywords: legs; ankles; surgical treatment; treatment outcomes; validation; psychometrics
Free keywords: ePRO; foot; ankle; validation; psychometrics; clinimetrics; patient-reported outcome
Contributing organizations
Ministry reporting: Yes
VIRTA submission year: 2021
JUFO rating: 1
