Which is the most useful patient-reported outcome in femoroacetabular impingement? Test–retest reliability of six questionnaires

Abstract

The majority of the questionnaires were reliable and precise enough for use at the group level. Samples of only 23-30 individuals were required to achieve acceptable measurement variation at the group level. Further direct comparisons of these questionnaires are required to assess other measurement properties such as validity, responsiveness and meaningful change in young people with FAI.

Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) questionnaires for young to middle-aged adults with hip and groin disability: a systematic review of the clinimetric evidence

“…IRT-based analysis was not performed in the studies concerning HAGOS, IHOT-12 and IHOT-33, as these studies were developed using only CTT-based analyses 11 12 14 38 40 41 45 47. Unidimensionality and structural validity can, however, also be evaluated by CTT, and IRT is therefore not a pre-requisite for evaluating these methodological aspects.…”

“…The other studies, including: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) in three studies,11 35 40 Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) in two studies,11 40 Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS) in three studies,31 37 40 Hip Sports Activity Scale (HSAS) in one study,44 Super Simple Hip Score (SUSHI) in one study39 and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index—12 (WOMAC-12) in one study36 had either no evaluation of their methodological quality concerning content validity specifically for young-aged and middle-aged patients, or a poor rating on this aspect. Furthermore, structural validity was either not assessed, or displayed poor methodology in all these studies, except in the study using WOMAC-12 36.…”

“…Responsiveness was investigated for nine questionnaires and found to be good for seven of them, including HAGOS, HOS, HOOS, IHOT-12, IHOT-33, mHHS and NAHS 11 14 34 40 41 46 47. The HSAS and SUSHI scored a negative rating since these studies only reported standardised response means as measures of responsiveness 39 44…”

Hip chondropathy at arthroscopy: prevalence and relationship to labral pathology, femoroacetabular impingement and patient-reported outcomes

“…However, the inclusion of a large range of pathology and the utilisation of a single surgeon performing the arthroscopy limit the effects of such bias on the results. Finally, we did not examine the preoperative PRO data 50. We chose to report PROs at 12–24 months postoperatively, as this is a time when recovery from surgery is generally considered to be complete, and follow these patients for a further 12 months to determine the natural history over this time.…”

The Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State for the Modified Harris Hip Score and Hip Outcome Score Among Patients Undergoing Surgical Treatment for Femoroacetabular Impingement

“…19 The test-retest reliability of the mHHS in a population with FAI was reported to be good, with an intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) value of 0.76. 9 In a heterogeneous population of patients undergoing hip arthroscopy for FAI, labral pathologic changes, or chondropathy, the mHHS demonstrated excellent testretest reliability (ICC, 0.91), construct validity, the presence of ceiling effects, and MCID of 8 points. 11 The HOS 3 contains 2 domains-activities of daily living (ADL) and sports-based on 26 items scored on a 5-point Likert scale.…”