Reliability and validity of the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form

Higgins, Laurence D.; Taylor, Marcus K.; Park, Daniel; Ghodadra, Neil; Marchant, Milford H.; Pietrobon, Ricardo; Cook, Chad

doi:10.1016/j.jbspin.2007.01.036

Cited by 305 publications

(228 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

222

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The mean O'Driscoll score was 15.1 AE 3.7 (range, [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] in the Cartipatch 1 group and 18.5 AE 2.5 (range, [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] in the mosaicplasty group, yielding a significant 3.3-point difference in favor of mosaicplasty (p ¼ 0.02). The O'Driscoll score was not significantly different between the groups with defects <3.5 cm 2 or !3.5 cm 2 (p ¼ 0.43 and p ¼ 0.28).…”

Section: Histologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Third‐generation autologous chondrocyte implantation versus mosaicplasty for knee cartilage injury: 2‐year randomized trial

Clavé

Potel

Servien

et al. 2016

Journal Orthopaedic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous surgical techniques have been developed to treat osteochondral defects of the knee. A study reported encouraging outcomes of third-generation autologous chondrocyte implantation achieved using the solid agarose-alginate scaffold Cartipatch 1 . Whether this scaffold is better than conventional techniques remains unclear. This multicenter randomized controlled trial compared 2-year functional outcomes (IKDC score) after Cartipatch 1 versus mosaicplasty in patients with isolated symptomatic femoral chondral defects (ICRS III and IV) measuring 2.5-7.5 cm 2 . In addition, a histological evaluation based on the O'Driscoll score was performed after 2 years. We needed 76 patients to demonstrate an at least 10-point subjective IKDC score difference with a ¼ 5% and 90% power. During the enrolment period, we were able to include 55 patients, 30 of them were allocated at random to Cartipatch 1 and 25 to mosaicplasty. After 2 years, eight patients had been lost to follow-up, six in the Cartipatch 1 group, and two in the mosaicplasty group. The baseline characteristics of the two groups were not significantly different. The mean IKDC score and score improvement after 2 years were respectively 73.7 AE 20.1 and 31.8 AE 20.8 with Cartipatch 1 and 81.5 AE 16.4 and 44.4 AE 15.2 with mosaicplasty. The 12.6-point absolute difference in favor of mosaicplasty is statistically significant. Twelve adverse events were recorded in the Cartipatch 1 group against six in the mosaicplasty group. After 2 years, functional outcomes were significantly worse after Cartipatch 1 treatment compared to mosaicplasty for isolated focal osteochondral defects of the femur. ß

show abstract

Section: Histologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Third‐generation autologous chondrocyte implantation versus mosaicplasty for knee cartilage injury: 2‐year randomized trial

Clavé

Potel

Servien

et al. 2016

Journal Orthopaedic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The final followup consisted of clinical evaluation and a series of self-administered questionnaires, including the subjective International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) form [11], Lysholm score, and Tegner level [38]. The patients were also asked whether they had recovered their preinjury work activity.…”

Section: Patients and Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical Technique: Articulated External Fixator for Treatment of Complex Knee Dislocation

Marcacci

Zaffagnini

Bonanzinga

et al. 2012

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently released their proposed TKA outcomes assessment rules to meet their pay-for-performance measures [5]. Various validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for the knee, including the Knee Injury Osteoarthritis Outcomes Survey (KOOS), Oxford Knee Score, and WOMAC, have been used to assess the outcomes of TKA and other treatments for end-stage knee osteoarthritis (OA) [3,4,6,10,16,17,19], but only the KOOS was adopted by the CMS.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the KOOS, JR: A Short-form Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes Survey

Lyman

Lee

Franklin

et al. 2016

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

290

228

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Medicare is rapidly moving toward using patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for outcomes assessment and justification of orthopaedic and other procedures. Numerous measures have been developed to study knee osteoarthritis (OA); however, many of these surveys are long, disruptive to clinic flow, and result in incomplete data capture and/or low followup rates. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome (KOOS) physical function short-form (KOOS-PS), while shorter, ignores pain, which is a primary concern of patients with advanced knee OA. Questions/purposes Our objective was to derive and validate a short-form survey focused on the patient with end-stage knee OA undergoing TKA.Methods Using our hospital's knee replacement registry, we retrospectively identified 2291 patients with knee OA who underwent primary unilateral TKA and had completed preoperative and 2-year postoperative PROMs. We assessed 30 items from the 42-item KOOS that were quantitatively most difficult for patients to perform before TKA and qualitatively most relevant to patients with endstage knee OA. Rasch analysis identified the KOOS, JR, a seven-item instrument, representing a single dimension, which we define as ''knee health'' because it reflects aspects of pain, symptom severity, and activities of daily living (ADL) including movements or activities that are directly relevant and difficult for patients with advanced knee OA. We assessed the internal consistency, external One or more of the authors (SL, PDF) has received funding from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (Rockville, MD, USA). One of the authors certifies that he (MBC), or a member of his or her immediate family, has or may receive payments or benefits, during the study period, an amount of USD 10,000 to USD 100,00 from Intellijoint (Waterloo, ON, Canada), an amount of USD 10,000 to USD 100,000 from Smith & Nephew (London, UK), an amount of USD 10,000 to USD 100,00 from Exactech (Gainesville, FL, USA), an amount of USD 10,000 to USD 100,00 from Link (Hamburg, Germany), and an amount of USD 10,000 to USD 100,000 from Acelity (San Antonio, TX, USA). One of the authors certifies that he (DEP) or a member of his or her immediate family, has or may receive payments or benefits, during the study period, an amount of more than USD 1,000,001 from Stryker-Mako (Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA). All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1 editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request. Each author certifies that his or her institution approved the human protocol for this investigation, that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research, and that informed consent for participation in the study was obtained.

show abstract

Reliability and validity of the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Form

Cited by 305 publications

References 21 publications

Third‐generation autologous chondrocyte implantation versus mosaicplasty for knee cartilage injury: 2‐year randomized trial

Third‐generation autologous chondrocyte implantation versus mosaicplasty for knee cartilage injury: 2‐year randomized trial

Surgical Technique: Articulated External Fixator for Treatment of Complex Knee Dislocation

Validation of the KOOS, JR: A Short-form Knee Arthroplasty Outcomes Survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About