Creating Crosswalks for Knee Outcomes After ACL Reconstruction Between the KOOS and the IKDC-SKF.
Journal
The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume
ISSN: 1535-1386
Titre abrégé: J Bone Joint Surg Am
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0014030
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 04 2022
20 04 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
23
2
2022
medline:
23
4
2022
entrez:
22
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) registries do not all use the same patient-reported outcome measures, limiting comparisons and preventing pooling of data for meta-analysis. Our objective was to create a statistical crosswalk to convert cohort and registry mean Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) to International Knee Documentation Committee-Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF) scores and vice versa to allow these comparisons. Data from 3 ACL registries were pooled (n = 14,412) and were separated into a training data set (70% of the sample) or a validation data set (30% of the sample). The KOOS and the IKDC-SKF scores were available prior to the operation and at 1, 2, and 5 or 6 years postoperatively. We used equipercentile equating methods to create crosswalks in the training data set and examined accuracy in the validation data set as well as bootstrapping analyses to assess the impact of sample size on accuracy. Preliminary analyses suggested that crosswalks could be attempted: large correlations between scores on the 2 measures (r = 0.84 to 0.94), unidimensionality of scores, and subpopulation invariance were deemed sufficient. When comparing actual scores with crosswalked scores in the validation data set, negligible bias was observed at the group level; however, individual score deviations were variable. The crosswalks are successful for the group level only. Our crosswalks successfully convert between the KOOS and the IKDC-SKF scores to allow for a group-level comparison of registry and other cohort data. These crosswalks allow comparisons among different national ligament registries as well as other research cohorts and studies; they also allow data from different patient-reported outcome measures to be pooled for meta-analysis. These crosswalks have great potential to improve our understanding of recovery after ACL reconstruction and aid in our ongoing efforts to improve outcomes and patient satisfaction, as well as to allow the continued analysis of historical data.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) registries do not all use the same patient-reported outcome measures, limiting comparisons and preventing pooling of data for meta-analysis. Our objective was to create a statistical crosswalk to convert cohort and registry mean Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (KOOS) to International Knee Documentation Committee-Subjective Knee Form (IKDC-SKF) scores and vice versa to allow these comparisons.
METHODS
Data from 3 ACL registries were pooled (n = 14,412) and were separated into a training data set (70% of the sample) or a validation data set (30% of the sample). The KOOS and the IKDC-SKF scores were available prior to the operation and at 1, 2, and 5 or 6 years postoperatively. We used equipercentile equating methods to create crosswalks in the training data set and examined accuracy in the validation data set as well as bootstrapping analyses to assess the impact of sample size on accuracy.
RESULTS
Preliminary analyses suggested that crosswalks could be attempted: large correlations between scores on the 2 measures (r = 0.84 to 0.94), unidimensionality of scores, and subpopulation invariance were deemed sufficient. When comparing actual scores with crosswalked scores in the validation data set, negligible bias was observed at the group level; however, individual score deviations were variable. The crosswalks are successful for the group level only.
CONCLUSIONS
Our crosswalks successfully convert between the KOOS and the IKDC-SKF scores to allow for a group-level comparison of registry and other cohort data.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
These crosswalks allow comparisons among different national ligament registries as well as other research cohorts and studies; they also allow data from different patient-reported outcome measures to be pooled for meta-analysis. These crosswalks have great potential to improve our understanding of recovery after ACL reconstruction and aid in our ongoing efforts to improve outcomes and patient satisfaction, as well as to allow the continued analysis of historical data.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35192570
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.20.02233
pii: 00004623-202204200-00008
pmc: PMC10591205
mid: NIHMS1933723
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
723-731Subventions
Organisme : NIAMS NIH HHS
ID : R01 AR053684
Pays : United States
Organisme : NICHD NIH HHS
ID : R37 HD037985
Pays : United States
Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Disclosure: The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (http://links.lww.com/JBJS/G949).
Références
Am J Sports Med. 2001 Sep-Oct;29(5):600-13
pubmed: 11573919
Arthroscopy. 2013 Apr;29(4):701-15
pubmed: 23402944
Am J Sports Med. 2014 May;42(5):1049-57
pubmed: 24644301
J Pers Assess. 2013;95(2):129-40
pubmed: 23030794
Am J Sports Med. 2016 Nov;44(11):2820-2826
pubmed: 27474383
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998 Aug;28(2):88-96
pubmed: 9699158
Am J Sports Med. 2018 Jul;46(9):2103-2112
pubmed: 29927640
Am J Sports Med. 2020 Jul;48(8):1953-1960
pubmed: 32515989
Br J Sports Med. 2017 Nov;51(22):1622-1629
pubmed: 28515057
Qual Life Res. 2012 Sep;21(7):1123-33
pubmed: 22048931
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2010 Nov;40(11):705-21
pubmed: 20710097
Am J Sports Med. 2018 Oct;46(12):2915-2921
pubmed: 30074823
Psychol Methods. 2016 Jun;21(2):137-50
pubmed: 26523435
Knee. 2015 Sep;22(4):351-3
pubmed: 25982300
Am J Sports Med. 2011 Mar;39(3):538-43
pubmed: 21098818
Psychol Assess. 2014 Jun;26(2):513-27
pubmed: 24548149
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020 Jun 3;102(11):983-990
pubmed: 32187121
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2016 May;46(5):357-64
pubmed: 26999412
J Knee Surg. 2010 Sep;23(3):137-51
pubmed: 21329255
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014 Aug 6;96(15):1233-1241
pubmed: 25100769
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1993;1(3-4):226-34
pubmed: 8536037
Br J Sports Med. 2015 Mar;49(5):335-42
pubmed: 23881894
Orthop J Sports Med. 2017 Dec 19;5(12):2325967117745279
pubmed: 29318172
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2015 Dec;23(12):3698-706
pubmed: 25193574
J Rehabil Res Dev. 2007;44(3):467-78
pubmed: 18247243
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2016 Aug;24(8):1317-29
pubmed: 27012756
Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2015 Jul;23(7):1122-9
pubmed: 25725392
J Orthop Res. 2013 Jan;31(1):2-9
pubmed: 22912340