Comparison of IKDC and SANE Outcome Measures Following Knee Injury in Active Female Patients

Andrew P Winterstein, Timothy A McGuine, Kathleen E Carr, Scott J Hetzel, Andrew P Winterstein, Timothy A McGuine, Kathleen E Carr, Scott J Hetzel

Abstract

Background: Knee injury among young, active female patients remains a public health issue. Clinicians are called upon to pay greater attention to patient-oriented outcomes to evaluate the impact of these injuries. Little agreement exists on which outcome measures are best, and clinicians cite several barriers to their use. Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE) may provide meaningful outcome information while lessening the time burden associated with other patient-oriented measures.

Hypothesis: The SANE and International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scores would be strongly correlated in a cohort of young active female patients with knee injuries from preinjury through 1-year follow-up and that a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) could be calculated for the SANE score.

Study design: Observational prospective cohort.

Methods: Two hundred sixty-three subjects completed SANE and IKDC at preinjury by recall, time of injury, and 3, 6, and 12 months postinjury. Pearson correlation coefficients were used to assess the association between SANE and IKDC. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to determine differences in SANE and IKDC over time. MCID was calculated for SANE using IKDC MCID as an anchor.

Results: Moderate to strong correlations were seen between SANE and IKDC (0.65-0.83). SANE, on average, was 2.7 (95% confidence interval, 1.5-3.9; P < 0.00) units greater than IKDC over all time points. MCID for the SANE was calculated as 7 for a 6-month follow-up and 19 for a 12-month follow-up.

Conclusion: SANE scores were moderately to strongly correlated to IKDC scores across all time points. Reported MCID values for the SANE should be utilized to measure meaningful changes over time for young, active female patients with knee injuries.

Clinical relevance: Providing clinicians with patient-oriented outcome measures that can be obtained with little clinician and patient burden may allow for greater acceptance and use of outcome measures in clinical settings.

Keywords: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC); Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE); knee injuries; patient-oriented outcomes.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors report no potential conflicts of interest in the development and publication of this manuscript.

References

    1. Agel J, Arendt EA, Bershadsky B. Anterior cruciate ligament injury in national collegiate athletic association basketball and soccer: a 13-year review. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33:524-530
    1. Agel J, Olson DE, Dick R, Arendt EA, Marshall SW, Sikka RS. Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate women’s basketball injuries: National Collegiate Athletic Association Injury Surveillance System, 1988-1989 through 2003-2004. J Athl Train. 2007;42:202-210
    1. Anderson AF, Irrgang JJ, Kocher MS, et al. The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form: normative data. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34:128-135
    1. Arendt EA, Agel J, Dick R. Anterior cruciate ligament injury patterns among collegiate men and women. J Athl Train. 1999;34:86-92
    1. Beasley LS, Chudik SC. Anterior cruciate ligament injury in children: update of current treatment options. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2003;15:45-52
    1. Beaton DE, Boers M, Wells GA. Many faces of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID): a literature review and directions for future research. Curr Opin Rheumatol. 2002;14:109-114
    1. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988;15:1833-1840
    1. Bent NP, Wright CC, Rushton AB, Batt ME. Selecting outcome measures in sports medicine: a guide for practitioners using the example of anterior cruciate ligament rehabilitation. Br J Sports Med. 2009;43:1006-1012
    1. Beynnon BD, Johnson RJ, Abate JA, Fleming BC, Nichols CE. Treatment of anterior cruciate ligament injuries, part I. Am J Sports Med. 2005;33:1579-1602
    1. Button K, van Deursen R, Price P. Measurement of functional recovery in individuals with acute anterior cruciate ligament rupture. Br J Sports Med. 2005;39:866-871
    1. Committee on Sports Medicine and Fitness American Academy of Pediatrics: medical conditions affecting sports participation. Pediatrics. 2001;107:1205-1209
    1. Czamara A. Functional benchmarking of rehabilitation outcomes following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil. 2010;12:519-533
    1. Denegar CR, Vela LI, Evans TA. Evidence-based sports medicine: outcomes instruments for active populations. Clin Sports Med. 2008;27:339-351
    1. Dick R, Putukian M, Agel J, Evans TA, Marshall SW. Descriptive epidemiology of collegiate women’s soccer injuries: National Collegiate Athletic Association Injury Surveillance System, 1988-1989 through 2002-2003. J Athl Train. 2007;42:278-285
    1. Dugan SA. Sports-related knee injuries in female athletes: what gives? Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005;84:122-130
    1. Dunn WR, Spindler KP, Consortium M. Predictors of activity level 2 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR): a Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) ACLR cohort study. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38:2040-2050
    1. Englund M, Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS. Patient-relevant outcomes fourteen years after meniscectomy: influence of type of meniscal tear and size of resection. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2001;40:631-639
    1. Fulkerson JP, Arendt EA. Anterior knee pain in females. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;(372):69-73
    1. Greco NJ, Anderson AF, Mann BJ, et al. Responsiveness of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form in comparison to the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, modified Cincinnati Knee Rating System, and Short Form 36 in patients with focal articular cartilage defects. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38:891-902
    1. Hefti F, Muller W, Jakob RP, Stäubli HU. Evaluation of knee ligament injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1993;1:226-234
    1. Hunt SA, Sherman O. Arthroscopic treatment of osteochondral lesions of the talus with correlation of outcome scoring systems. Arthroscopy. 2003;19:360-367
    1. Ingram JG, Fields SK, Yard EE, Comstock RD. Epidemiology of knee injuries among boys and girls in US high school athletics. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36:1116-1122
    1. Ireland ML. Anterior cruciate ligament injury in female athletes: epidemiology. J Athl Train. 1999;34:150-154
    1. Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF. Development and validation of health-related quality of life measures for the knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;(402):95-109
    1. Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL, et al. Development and validation of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29:600-613
    1. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status. Ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10:407-415
    1. Knowles SB. Is there an injury epidemic in girls’ sports? Br J Sports Med. 2010;44:38-44
    1. Louw QA, Manilall J, Grimmer KA. Epidemiology of knee injuries among adolescents: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2008;42:2-10
    1. Lysholm J, Gillquist J. Evaluation of knee ligament surgery results with special emphasis on use of a scoring scale. Am J Sports Med. 1982;10:150-154
    1. Martin RL, Irrgang JJ, Burdett RG, Conti SF, Van Swearingen JM. Evidence of validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Foot Ankle Int. 2005;26:968-983
    1. Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF. A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:730-735
    1. McGuine T. Sports injuries in high school athletes: a review of injury-risk and injury-prevention research. Clin J Sport Med. 2006;16:488-499
    1. McGuine TA, Leverson G. The reliability and responsiveness of the SANE knee score in high school athletes. In: National Athletic Trainers Association Annual Meeting. St. Louis, MO: Natinoal Athletic Trainers Association; 2008:S98
    1. Michener LA. Patient- and clinician-rated outcome measures for clinical decision making in rehabilitation. J Sport Rehabil. 2011;20:37-45
    1. Mountcastle SB, Posner M, Kragh JF, Jr, Taylor DC. Gender differences in anterior cruciate ligament injury vary with activity: epidemiology of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in a young, athletic population. Am J Sports Med. 2007;35:1635-1642
    1. Noyes FR, Barber SD, Mooar LA. A rationale for assessing sports activity levels and limitations in knee disorders. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989;(246):238-249
    1. Parsons JT, Snyder AR. Health-related quality of life as a primary clinical outcome in sport rehabilitation. J Sport Rehabil. 2011;20:17-36
    1. Risberg MA, Holm I, Steen H, Beynnon BD. Sensitivity to changes over time for the IKDC form, the Lysholm score, and the Cincinnati knee score. A prospective study of 120 ACL reconstructed patients with a 2-year follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1999;7:152-159
    1. Roos EM, Lohmander LS. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): from joint injury to osteoarthritis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:64.
    1. Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)—development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;28:88-96
    1. Schmitt LC, Paterno MV, Huang S. Validity and internal consistency of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee evaluation form in children and adolescents. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38:2443-2447
    1. Shelbourne KD, Barnes AF, Gray T. Correlation of a Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) rating with modified Cincinnati knee rating system and IKDC subjective total scores for patients after ACL reconstruction or knee arthroscopy. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40:2487-2491
    1. Snyder AR, Parsons JT, Valovich McLeod TC, et al. Using disablement models and clinical outcomes assessment to enable evidence-based athletic training practice, part I: disablement models. J Athl Train. 2008;43:428-436
    1. Spindler KP, Huston LJ, Wright RW, et al. The prognosis and predictors of sports function and activity at minimum 6 years after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction: a population cohort study. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39:348-359
    1. Spindler KP, Warren TA, Callison JC, Jr, Secic M, Fleisch SB, Wright RW. Clinical outcome at a minimum of five years after reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1673-1679
    1. Suk M HB, Norvell DC, Helfet DL. The AO Handbook of Musculoskeletal Outcomes Measures and Instruments. 2nd ed. Davos, Switzerland: Thieme; 2009
    1. Tanner SM, Dainty KN, Marx RG, Kirkley A. Knee-specific quality-of-life instruments: which ones measure symptoms and disabilities most important to patients? Am J Sports Med. 2007;35:1450-1458
    1. Taylor DC, Posner M, Curl WW, Feagin JA. Isolated tears of the anterior cruciate ligament over 30-year follow-up of patients treated with arthrotomy and primary repair. Am J Sports Med. 2009;37:65-71
    1. Team RC. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2012
    1. Valovich McLeod TC, Snyder AR, Parsons JT, Curtis Bay R, Michener LA, Sauers EL. Using disablement models and clinical outcomes assessment to enable evidence-based athletic training practice, part II: clinical outcomes assessment. J Athl Train. 2008;43:437-445
    1. von Porat A, Roos EM, Roos H. High prevalence of osteoarthritis 14 years after an anterior cruciate ligament tear in male soccer players: a study of radiographic and patient relevant outcomes. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63:269-273
    1. Williams GN, Gangel TJ, Arciero RA, Uhorchak JM, Taylor DC. Comparison of the single assessment numeric evaluation method and two shoulder rating scales. Outcomes measures after shoulder surgery. Am J Sports Med. 1999;27:214-221
    1. Williams GN, Taylor DC, Gangel TJ, Uhorchak JM, Arciero RA. Comparison of the single assessment numeric evaluation method and the Lysholm score. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;(373):184-192
    1. Wright RW. Knee injury outcomes measures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009;17:31-39

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbejdspartnere

Medicinske tilstande

Narkotikainterventioner

3
Abonner