The Swedish version of OMAS is a reliable and valid outcome measure for patients with ankle fractures

Gertrud M Nilsson, Magnus Eneroth, Charlotte S Ekdahl, Gertrud M Nilsson, Magnus Eneroth, Charlotte S Ekdahl

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the test-retest reliability and the validity of the self-reported questionnaire Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS) in subjects after an ankle fracture.

Methods: When evaluating the test-retest reliability of the OMAS, 42 subjects surgically treated due to an ankle fracture participated 12 months after injury. OMAS was completed by the patients on two occasions at one to two weeks' interval. Concurrent criterion validity was evaluated using the five subscales of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) and global self-rating function (GSRF), which is a five-grade Likert scale with the alternatives: "very good", "good", "fair", "poor", "very poor". Forty-six patients participated in the validation against FAOS, and for GSRF 105 patients participated at 6 months and 99 at 12 months. Uni-, bi- and trimalleolar fractures were all included and both non-rigid and rigid surgical techniques were used. All fractures healed without complications. Before analysis of the results the five groups according to GSRF were reduced to three: "good", "fair" and "poor". Test-retest reliability was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), the standard error of measurement (SEM and SEM%) and the smallest real difference (SRD and SRD%). The Cronbach's alpha score and validity versus FAOS was assessed using Spearman's rank correlation and validity versus GSRF using the Kruskal-Wallis Test and the Mann-Whitney U-Test as ad hoc analyses.

Results: The test-retest reliability correlation coefficient obtained was rho = 0.95 and ICC = 0.94. The SEM was 4.4 points and SEM% 5.8% and should be interpreted as the smallest change that indicates a real change of clinical interest for a group of subjects. The SRD was 12 points and SRD% 15.8% and should be interpreted as the smallest change that indicates a real change of clinical interest for a single subject. The correlation coefficients versus the five subscales of FAOS ranged from rho = 0.80 to 0.86. There were significant differences between GSRF groups "good", "fair" and "poor" (p < 0.001) at both the six-month and the 12-month follow-up. The internal consistency for the OMAS was 0.76. The effect size between results from 6-month and 12-month follow-up turned out be 0.44 and should be considered as medium.

Conclusion: The results showed that the test-retest reliability of the Swedish version of OMAS was very high in subjects after an ankle fracture and the standard error of measurement was low. Furthermore the OMAS was found to be valid using both the five subscales of FAOS and the GSRF. The OMAS can thus be used as an outcome measure after an ankle fracture.

References

    1. Kannus P, Palvanen M, Niemi S. Increasing number and incidence of low-trauma ankle fractures in elderly people: Finnish statistics during 1970–2000 and projections for the future. Bone. 2002;31:430–433. doi: 10.1016/S8756-3282(02)00832-3.
    1. Van Staa TP, Dennison EM, Leufkens HG. Epidemiology of fractures in England and Wales. Bone. 2001;29:517–522. doi: 10.1016/S8756-3282(01)00614-7.
    1. Court-Brown C, Caesar B. Epidemiology of adult fractures: A review. Injury. 2006;37:691–697. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2006.04.130.
    1. Jensen S, Andresen B, Mencke S. Epidemiology of ankle fractures. A prospective population-based study of 212 cases in Aalborg, Denmark. Acta Orthop Scand. 1998;69:48–50. doi: 10.3109/17453679809002356.
    1. Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Orav JE, Barrett J. Effect of seasonality and weather on fracture risk in individuals 65 years and older. Osteoporos Int. 2007;18:1225–1233. doi: 10.1007/s00198-007-0364-6.
    1. Kannus P, Parkkari J, Niemi S. Epidemiology of osteoporotic ankle fractures in elderly persons in Finland. Ann Int Med. 1996;125:975–978.
    1. Hasselman C, Molly T, Stone K. Foot and ankle fractures in elderly white women. Incidence and risk factors. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A:820–824.
    1. Cedell C-A. Supination-outward rotation injuries of the ankle. Copenhagen: Munksgaard; 1967. (Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavia, Suppl No. 110).
    1. Pettrone F, Gail M, Pee D. Quantitative criteria for prediction of the results after displaced fracture of the ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983;65:667–677.
    1. De Souza L, Gustilo R, Meyer T. Results of operative treatment of displaced external rotation-abduction fractures of the ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985;67:1066–1074.
    1. Lindsjö U. Operative treatment of ankle fracture-dislocations: a follow-up of 306/321 consecutive cases. Clin Orthop. 1985;199:28–38.
    1. Stufkens SA, van den Bekerom MP, Doornberg JN. Evidence-Based Treatment of Maisonneuve Fractures. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2011;50:62–67. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2010.08.017. Review.
    1. Lindsjö U. Operative treatment of ankle fractures. [In Swedish: Operativ behandling av fotledsfrakturer] Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala University; 1980. (PhD thesis).
    1. Olerud C, Molander H. Bi- and trimalleolar ankle fractures operated on with nonrigid internal fixation. Clin Orthop Relate Res. 1986;206:253–260.
    1. Ahl T, Dalen N, Selvik G. Ankle fractures. A clinical and roentgenographic stereophotogrammetric study. Clinical Orthop Relate Res. 1989;245:246–255.
    1. Tropp H, Norlin R. Ankle performance after ankle fracture: a randomized study of early mobilization. Foot Ankle Int. 1995;16:79–83. doi: 10.1177/107110079501600205.
    1. Hedström M, Ahl T, Dalen N. Early postoperative ankle exercise. A study of postoperative lateral malleolar fractures. Clinical Orthop Relate Res. 1994;300:193–196.
    1. Lehtonen H, Jarvinen TL, Honkonen S. Use of a cast compared with a functional ankle brace after operative treatment of an ankle fracture. A prospective, randomized study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A:205–211.
    1. Belcher GL, Radomisli TE, Abate JA. Functional outcome analysis of operatively treated malleolar fractures. J Orthop Trauma. 1997;11:106–109. doi: 10.1097/00005131-199702000-00007.
    1. Egol KA, Dolan R, Koval KJ. Functional outcome of surgery for fractures of the ankle. A prospective, randomised comparison of management in a cast or a functional brace. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000;82:46–49.
    1. Egol KA, Tejwani NC, Walsh MG. Predictors of short-term functional outcome following ankle fracture surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:974–979. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.E.00343.
    1. Nilsson G, Nyberg P, Ekdahl C. Performance after surgical treatment of patients with ankle fractures 14-month follow up. Phys Res Int. 2003;8:69–82.
    1. Lash N, Horne G, Fielden J. Ankle fractures: functional and lifestyle outcomes at 2 years. ANZ J Surg. 2002;72:724–730. doi: 10.1046/j.1445-2197.2002.02530.x.
    1. Day G, Swanson C, Hulcombe B. Operative treatment of ankle fractures: a minimum ten-year follow-up. Foot Ankle. 2001;2:102–106.
    1. Bauer M. Ankle fractures. With special reference to post-traumatic arthrosis. Lund, Sweden: Lund University; 1985. (PhD thesis).
    1. Olerud C, Molander H. A scoring scale for symptom evaluation after ankle fracture. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1984;103:190–194. doi: 10.1007/BF00435553.
    1. Ahl T, Dalen N, Lundberg A, Bylund C. Early mobilization of operated on ankle fractures. Prospective, controlled study of 40 bimalleolar cases. Acta Orthop Scand. 1993;64:95–99. doi: 10.3109/17453679308994541.
    1. Ponzer S, Nåsell H, Bergman B. Functional outcome and quality of life patients with Type B ankle fractures: a two-year follow up study. J Orthop Trauma. 1999;13:363–368. doi: 10.1097/00005131-199906000-00007.
    1. Nilsson GM, Jonsson K, Ekdahl CS. Effects of a training program after surgically treated ankle fracture: a prospective randomised controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2009;10:118. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-10-118.
    1. Shaffer M, Okereke E, Esterhai J. Effects of immobilization on plantar-flexion torque, fatigue resistance, and functional ability following an ankle fracture. Phys Ther. 2000;80:769–780.
    1. Nilsson GM, Jonsson K, Ekdahl CS. Outcome and quality of life after surgically treated ankle fractures in patients 65 years or older. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007;20(8):127.
    1. WHO. ICF – international classification of functioning, disability and health. Geneva: WHO Library; 2001.
    1. Karlsson J, Peterson L. Evaluation of ankle and joint function: the use of a scoring scale. The Foot. 1991;1:15–19. doi: 10.1016/0958-2592(91)90006-W.
    1. Kaikkonen A, Kannus P, Järvinen M. A performance test protocol and scoring scale for the evaluation of ankle injuries. Am J Sports Med. 1994;22:462–469. doi: 10.1177/036354659402200405.
    1. Roos EM, Brandsson S, Karlsson J. Validation of the foot and ankle outcome score for ankle ligament reconstruction. Foot Ankle Int. 2001;22:788–794.
    1. Haywood KL, Hargreaves J, Lamb SE. Multi-item outcome measures for lateral ligament injury of the ankle: a structured review. J Eval Clin Pact. 2004;10:339–352. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2003.00435.x.
    1. Wang R, Thur CK, Gutierrez-Farewik EM. One year follow-up after operative ankle fractures: a prospective gait analysis study with a multi-segment foot model. Gait Posture. 2010;31:234–240. doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.10.012.
    1. Wees P, Hendriks E, Beers H. Validity and responsiveness of the ankle function score after acute ankle injury. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2012;22:170–174. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0838.2010.01243.x.
    1. Rose A, Lee RJ, Williams RM. Functional instability in non-contact ankle ligament injuries. Br J Sports Med. 2000;34:352–358. doi: 10.1136/bjsm.34.5.352.
    1. Karatepe AG, Günaydin R, Kayak T. Validation of the Turkish version of the foot and ankle outcome score. Rheumatol Int. 2009;30:169–173. doi: 10.1007/s00296-009-0929-0.
    1. Nilsson-Helander K, Thomée R, Silbernagel KG. The achilles tendon total rupture score (ATRS) Am J Sports Med. 2007;35:421–426.
    1. Munro BH. Statistical Methods for Health Care Research. 4. JB Lippincott: Philadelphia. Pa; 2000.
    1. Bland JM, Altman DG. Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ. 1997;314:572. doi: 10.1136/bmj.314.7080.572.
    1. Beckerman H, Roebroeck ME, Lankhorst GJ. Smallest real difference, a link beteewen reproducibility and responsiveness. Oual Life Res. 2001;10:571–578. doi: 10.1023/A:1013138911638.
    1. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ. Evaluation patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assessment. 1998;2:14.
    1. Nunnaly J, Bernstein JC. Psychometric theory. 3. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.
    1. Domholdt E. Rehabilitation Research. Principles and Applications. 3. St Louis, Mo: Elsevier Saunders; 2005.
    1. Negahban H, Mazaheri M, Salavati M. Reliability and validity of the foot and ankle outcome score: a validation study from Iran. Clin Rheumatol. 2010;29:479–486. doi: 10.1007/s10067-009-1344-3.
    1. Sefton GK, George J, Fitton JM, McMullen H. Reconstruction of the anterior talofibular ligament for the treatment of the unstable ankle. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1979;61:352–354.
    1. Nilsson GM, Jonsson K, Ekdahl CS. Unsatisfactory outcome following surgical intervention of ankle fractures. Foot Ankle Surg. 2005;11:11–16. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2004.10.004.
    1. Thomas G, Whalley H, Modi C. Early mobilization of operatively fixed ankle fractures: a systematic review. Foot Ankle Int. 2009;30:666–674. doi: 10.3113/FAI.2009.0666. Review.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다