The clinimetric qualities of patient-assessed instruments for measuring chronic ankle instability: A systematic review

Abstract

Background: The assessment of outcomes from the patient's perspective becomes more recognized in health care. Also in patients with chronic ankle instability, the degree of present impairments, disabilities and participation problems should be documented from the perspective of the patient. The decision about which patient-assessed instrument is most appropriate for clinical practice should be based upon systematic reviews. Only rating scales constructed for patients with acute ligament injuries were systematically reviewed in the past. The aim of this study was to review systematically the clinimetric qualities of patient-assessed instruments designed for patients with chronic ankle instability.

Evaluation of the methodological quality of systematic reviews of health status measurement instruments

“…factor analysis and Cronbach's alpha), and alpha is between 0.70 and 0.90; ± doubtful method used (no factor analysis); -inadequate internal consistency (alpha \0.70); ? no information found on internal consistency'' [30,41,42].…”

Differences in Lateral Ankle Laxity Measured via Stress Ultrasonography in Individuals With Chronic Ankle Instability, Ankle Sprain Copers, and Healthy Individuals

“…The FAAM has been demonstrated to be an appropriate, patient-oriented outcomes instrument for use in individuals with CAI. 11 Carcia et al 7 similarly identified group differences in FAAM scores between healthy athletes (100%  0% and 99%  4%) and those with CAI (88%  8% and 76%  13%). These results are also similar to those reported by Hale and Hertel, 18 who identified group differences on the Foot and Ankle Disability Index between recreational athletes with CAI and healthy subjects without a history of ankle injury.…”

Treatment of osteochondral defects of the talus

“…115 The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) is a valid and reliable instrument. 115,336 The score is available in English, Swedish, Portuguese, Persian, Turkish, and Dutch.…”

“…115 The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) is a valid and reliable instrument. 115,336 The score is available in English, Swedish, Portuguese, Persian, Turkish, and Dutch. 5,207,297,336,356 Germany has the largest population of Europe but, to our knowledge, has no validated outcome score for general foot and ankle pathology.…”

“…The assessment of outcome from the patient's perspective becomes more recognized. 115 Questionnaires are used to asses the patient's perspective on the degree of impairment, pain, disabilities, and quality of life. Translation and validation of the original questionnaire into the target language are essential for the conduction of multinational studies and for the comparison of outcomes from different countries.…”