PDF icon PDF herunterladen
Open Access
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2022; 57(06): 1014-1021
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1740470
Artigo Original
Joelho

Clinical Outcome Measures in Arthroscopic Meniscectomy: Clinician versus Patient Completed Knee Scores

Artikel in mehreren Sprachen: português | English
Oday Al-Dadah 
1   Translational and Clinical Research Institute, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Newcastle University, Framlington Place, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Reino Unido
2   Departamento de Trauma e Cirurgia Ortopédica, South Tyneside Hospital, Harton Lane, South Tyneside, Reino Unido
,
Lee Shepstone
3   Medical School, University of East Anglia, Earlham Road, Norwich, Reino Unido
,
Simon T. Donell
3   Medical School, University of East Anglia, Earlham Road, Norwich, Reino Unido
› Institutsangaben

Funding The present study was funded by the Gwen Fish Charity Trust, the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital Research Fund, and the Action Arthritis Charity Trust.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar aufeRef
  Lizenzen und Reprints
Preview

Abstract

Objective The aim of the present study was to investigate the difference between clinician-completed and patient-completed outcome scores in detecting improvement following arthroscopic meniscectomy in patients with meniscal tears of the knee.

Methods Thirty-four patients with meniscal tears were prospectively assessed using 9 clinical outcome measures. The five clinician-completed knee scores included the Tegner Activity Score, the Lysholm Knee Score, the Cincinnati Knee Score, the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Examination Knee Score, and the Tapper and Hoover Meniscal Grading Score. The four patient-completed knee scores included the IKDC Subjective Knee Score, the Knee Outcome Survey – Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADLS), the Short Form-12 Item Health Survey (SF-12), and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Twenty-nine of the 34 patients underwent an arthroscopic meniscectomy and were reassessed with all 9 outcome scores upon their follow-up review.

Results A significant longitudinal improvement was observed in 4 of the 5 clinician-completed scores (Tegner [p < 0.001], Lysholm [p = 0.004], Cincinnati [p = 0.002] and Tapper and Hoover [p < 0.001], but not in the IKDC Examination [p = 0.332]. However, the IKDC Subjective score (p = 0.021) was the only patient-completed score to demonstrate significant improvement postoperatively.

Conclusion Overall, clinician-completed scoring systems were found to be inconsistent with those of patient-completed instruments. The mode of administering outcome measures can have a significant influence on the outcome results both for research and for clinical practice. A combination of both a clinician-completed with a patient-completed instrument may be a more balanced approach to assessing and quantifying meniscus tears and the outcome following arthroscopic meniscectomy.

Keywords

meniscus - meniscectomy - patient reported outcome measures - Lysholm knee score


Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 05. April 2021

Angenommen: 13. August 2021

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
21. Januar 2022

© 2022. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil