SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • 1
    Garratt AM, Brealey S, Gillespie WJ. Patient-assessed health instruments for the knee: a structured review. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2004; 43: 141423.
  • 2
    Veenhof C, Bijlsma JW, van den Ende CH, van Dijk GM, Pisters MF, Dekker J. Psychometric evaluation of osteoarthritis questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Arthritis Rheum 2006; 55: 48092.
  • 3
    Paxton EW, Fithian DC. Outcome instruments for patellofemoral arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; 436: 6670.
  • 4
    Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008.
  • 5
    Roos EM, Engelhart L, Ranstam J, Anderson AF, Irrgang J, Marx RG, et al. ICRS recommendation document: patient-reported outcome instruments for use in patients with articular cartilage defects. Cartilage 2011; 2: 12236.
  • 6
    McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res 1995; 4: 293307.
  • 7
    Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60: 3442.
  • 8
    Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63: 73745.
  • 9
    Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
  • 10
    Kvien TK, Heiberg T, Hagen KB. Minimal clinically important improvement/difference (MCII/MCID) and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS): what do these concepts mean? Ann Rheum Dis 2007; 66 Suppl: iii401.
  • 11
    Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL, Harner CD, Kurosaka M, Neyret P, et al. Development and validation of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med 2001; 29: 60013.
  • 12
    Hefti F, Muller W, Jakob RP, Staubli HU. Evaluation of knee ligament injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1993; 1: 22634.
  • 13
    Anderson AF. Rating scales. In: Fu FH, Harner CD, Vince KL, editors. Knee surgery. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1994. p. 27596.
  • 14
    Anderson AF, Irrgang JJ, Kocher MS, Mann BJ, Harrast JJ. The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form: normative data. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34: 12835.
  • 15
    Padua R, Bondi R, Ceccarelli E, Bondi L, Romanini E, Zanoli G, et al. Italian version of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form: cross-cultural adaptation and validation. Arthroscopy 2004; 20: 81923.
  • 16
    Metsavaht L, Leporace G, Riberto M, de Mello Sposito MM, Batista LA. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Brazilian version of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form: validity and reproducibility. Am J Sports Med 2010; 38: 18949.
  • 17
    Fu SN, Chan YH. Translation and validation of Chinese version of International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Disabil Rehabil 2011; 33: 11869.
  • 18
    Haverkamp D, Sierevelt IN, Breugem SJ, Lohuis K, Blankevoort L, van Dijk CN. Translation and validation of the Dutch version of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34: 16804.
  • 19
    Lertwanich P, Praphruetkit T, Keyurapan E, Lamsam C, Kulthanan T. Validity and reliability of Thai version of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. J Med Assoc Thai 2008; 91: 121825.
  • 20
    Crawford K, Briggs KK, Rodkey WG, Steadman JR. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the IKDC score for meniscus injuries of the knee. Arthroscopy 2007; 23: 83944.
  • 21
    Higgins LD, Taylor MK, Park D, Ghodadra N, Marchant M, Pietrobon R, et al. Reliability and validity of the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form. Joint Bone Spine 2007; 74: 5949.
  • 22
    Agel J, LaPrade RF. Assessment of differences between the modified Cincinnati and International Knee Documentation Committee patient outcome scores: a prospective study. Am J Sports Med 2009; 37: 21517.
  • 23
    Greco NJ, Anderson AF, Mann BJ, Cole BJ, Farr J, Nissen CW, 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: 891902.
  • 24
    Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL, Harner CD, Neyret P, Richmond JC, et al. Responsiveness of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med 2006; 34: 156773.
  • 25
    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: 8896.
  • 26
    Paradowski PT, Bergman S, Sunden-Lundius A, Lohmander LS, Roos EM. Knee complaints vary with age and gender in the adult population: population-based reference data for the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2006; 7: 38.
  • 27
    Roos EM, Roos HP, Ekdahl C, Lohmander LS. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): validation of a Swedish version. Scand J Med Sci Sports 1998; 8: 43948.
  • 28
    Roos EM, Toksvig-Larsen S. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1: 17.
  • 29
    Xie F, Li SC, Roos EM, Fong KY, Lo NN, Yeo SJ, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Singapore English and Chinese versions of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in Asians with knee osteoarthritis in Singapore. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2006; 14: 1098103.
  • 30
    De Groot IB, Favejee MM, Reijman M, Verhaar JA, Terwee CB. The Dutch version of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score: a validation study. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008; 6: 16.
  • 31
    Ornetti P, Parratte S, Gossec L, Tavernier C, Argenson JN, Roos EM, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the French version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in knee osteoarthritis patients. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2008; 16: 4238.
  • 32
    Salavati M, Mazaheri M, Negahban H, Sohani SM, Ebrahimian MR, Ebrahimi I, et al. Validation of a Persian-version of Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in Iranians with knee injuries. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2008; 16: 117882.
  • 33
    Goncalves RS, Cabri J, Pinheiro JP, Ferreira PL. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Portuguese version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17: 115662.
  • 34
    Chaipinyo K. Test-retest reliability and construct validity of Thai version of Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Thai J Phys Ther 2009; 31: 6776.
  • 35
    Paker N, Bugdayci D, Sabirli F, Ozel S, Ersoy S. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score: reliability and validation of the Turkish version. Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci 2007; 27: 3506.
  • 36
    Bekkers JE, de Windt TS, Raijmakers NJ, Dhert WJ, Saris DB. Validation of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) for the treatment of focal cartilage lesions. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17: 14349.
  • 37
    Salavati M, Akhbari B, Mohammadi F, Mazaheri M, Khorrami M. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): reliability and validity in competitive athletes after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2011; 19: 40610.
  • 38
    Comins J, Brodersen J, Krogsgaard M, Beyer N. Rasch analysis of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): a statistical re-evaluation. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2008; 18: 33645.
  • 39
    Perruccio AV, Stefan Lohmander L, Canizares M, Tennant A, Hawker GA, Conaghan PG, et al. The development of a short measure of physical function for knee OA KOOS-Physical Function Shortform (KOOS-PS): an OARSI/OMERACT initiative. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2008; 16: 54250.
  • 40
    Ornetti P, Perruccio AV, Roos EM, Lohmander LS, Davis AM, Maillefert JF. Psychometric properties of the French translation of the reduced KOOS and HOOS (KOOS-PS and HOOS-PS). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17: 16048.
  • 41
    Goncalves RS, Cabri J, Pinheiro JP, Ferreira PL, Gil J. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Portuguese version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical Function Short-form (KOOS-PS). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2010; 18: 3726.
  • 42
    Davis AM, Perruccio AV, Canizares M, Hawker GA, Roos EM, Maillefert JF, et al. Comparative, validity and responsiveness of the HOOS-PS and KOOS-PS to the WOMAC physical function subscale in total joint replacement for osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17: 8437.
  • 43
    Irrgang JJ, Snyder-Mackler L, Wainner RS, Fu FH, Harner CD. Development of a patient-reported measure of function of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1998; 80: 113245.
  • 44
    Marx R. Knee rating scales. Arthroscopy 2003; 19: 11038.
  • 45
    Piva SR, Gil AB, Moore CG, Fitzgerald GK. Responsiveness of the activities of daily living scale of the knee outcome survey and numeric pain rating scale in patients with patellofemoral pain. J Rehabil Med 2009; 41: 12935.
  • 46
    Impellizzeri F, Mannion A, Leunig M, Bizzini M, Naal F. Comparison of the reliability, responsiveness, and construct validity of 4 different questionnaires for evaluating outcomes after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2010. E-pub ahead of print.
  • 47
    Marx RG, Jones EC, Allen AA, Altchek DW, O'Brien SJ, Rodeo SA, et al. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of four knee outcome scales for athletic patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001; 83-A: 145969.
  • 48
    Irrgang J. Development of a health related quality of life instrument to assess physical function related to pathology and impairment of the knee. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh; 1999.
  • 49
    Bizzini M, Gorelick M. Development of a German version of the knee outcome survey for daily activities. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2007; 127: 7819.
  • 50
    Goncalves R, Cabri J, Pinheiro J. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Portuguese version of the Knee Outcome Survey-Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADLS). Clin Rheumatol 2008; 27: 14459.
  • 51
    Evcik D, Ay S, Ege A, Turel A, Kavuncu V. Adaptation and validation of Turkish version of the Knee Outcome Survey-Activities for Daily Living Scale. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467: 207782.
  • 52
    Kapreli E, Panelli G, Strimpakos N, Billis E, Zacharopoulos A, Athanasopoulos S. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Greek version of the Knee Outcome Survey-Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADLS). Knee 2010. E-pub ahead of print.
  • 53
    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: 1504.
  • 54
    Tegner Y, Lysholm J. Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1985; 198: 439.
  • 55
    Briggs KK, Lysholm J, Tegner Y, Rodkey WG, Kocher MS, Steadman JR. The reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Lysholm Score and Tegner Activity Scale for anterior cruciate ligament injuries of the knee: 25 years later. Am J Sports Med 2009; 37: 8907.
  • 56
    Hoher J, Bach T, Munster A, Bouillon B, Tiling T. Does the mode of data collection change results in a subjective knee score? Self-administration versus interview. Am J Sports Med 1997; 25: 6427.
  • 57
    Smith HJ, Richardson JB, Tennant A. Modification and validation of the Lysholm Knee Scale to assess articular cartilage damage. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17: 538.
  • 58
    Briggs KK, Steadman JR, Hay CJ, Hines SL. Lysholm score and Tegner activity level in individuals with normal knees. Am J Sports Med 2009; 37: 898901.
  • 59
    Demirdjian AM, Petrie SG, Guanche CA, Thomas KA. The outcomes of two knee scoring questionnaires in a normal population. Am J Sports Med 1998; 26: 4651.
  • 60
    Oretorp N, Gillquist J, Liljedahl SO. Long term results of surgery for non-acute anteromedial rotatory instability of the knee. Acta Orthop Scand 1979; 50: 32936.
  • 61
    Briggs KK, Kocher MS, Rodkey WG, Steadman JR. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Lysholm Knee Score and the Tegner Activity Scale for patients with meniscal injury of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88: 698705.
  • 62
    Heintjes EM, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Berger MY, Koes BW. Lysholm scale and WOMAC index were responsive in prospective cohort of young general practice patients. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61: 4818.
  • 63
    Kocher MS, Steadman JR, Briggs KK, Sterett WI, Hawkins RJ. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Lysholm knee scale for various chondral disorders of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86-A: 113945.
  • 64
    Paxton EW, Fithian DC, Stone ML, Silva P. The reliability and validity of knee-specific and general health instruments in assessing acute patellar dislocation outcomes. Am J Sports Med 2003; 31: 48792.
  • 65
    Sgaglione NA, Del Pizzo W, Fox JM, Friedman MJ. Critical analysis of knee ligament rating systems. Am J Sports Med 1995; 23: 6607.
  • 66
    Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1998; 80: 639.
  • 67
    Murray D, Fitzpatrick R, Rogers K, Pandit H, Beard D, Carr A, et al. The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007; 89: 10104.
  • 68
    Xie F, Li S, Lo N, Yeo S, Yang K, Yeo W, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Singapore English and Chinese Versions of the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in knee osteoarthritis patients undergoing total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2007; 15: 101924.
  • 69
    Naal F, Impellizzeri F, Sieverding M, Loibl M, Von Knoch F, Mannion A, et al. The 12-item Oxford Knee Score: cross-cultural adaptation into German and assessment of its psychometric properties in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17: 4952.
  • 70
    Takeuchi R, Sawaguchi T, Nakamura N, Ishikawa H, Saito T, Goldhahn S. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Oxford 12-item knee score in Japanese. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011; 131: 24754.
  • 71
    Dunbar M, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L. Translation and validation of the Oxford-12 item knee score for use in Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand 2000; 71: 26874.
  • 72
    Charoencholvanich K, Pongcharoen B. Oxford knee score and SF-36: translation & reliability for use with total knee arthroscopy patients in Thailand. J Med Assoc Thai 2005; 88: 1194202.
  • 73
    Conaghan PG, Emerton M, Tennant A. Internal construct validity of the Oxford Knee Scale: evidence from Rasch measurement. Arthritis Rheum 2007; 57: 13637.
  • 74
    Ko Y, Lo N, Yeo S, Yang K, Yeo W, Chong H, et al. Rasch analysis of the Oxford Knee Score. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17: 11639.
  • 75
    Garratt A, Brealey S, Gillespie W. Patient-assessed health instruments for the knee: a structured review. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2004; 43: 141423.
  • 76
    Moonot P, Medalla G, Matthews D, Kalairajah Y, Field R. Correlation between the Oxford Knee and American Knee Society scores at mid-term follow-up. J Knee Surg 2009; 22: 22630.
  • 77
    Medalla GA, Moonot P, Peel T, Kalairajah Y, Field RE. Cost-benefit comparison of the Oxford Knee Score and the American Knee Society Score in measuring outcome of total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24: 6526.
  • 78
    Bellamy N. WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index user guide. London (Ontario, Canada): University of Western Ontario; 1995.
  • 79
    Bellamy N. WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index user guide. Version V. Brisbane (Australia): CONROD, The University of Queensland; 2002.
  • 80
    WOMAC-AUSCAN-osteoarthritis global index. URL: http://www.womac.org.
  • 81
    Ornetti P, Dougados M, Paternotte S, Logeart I, Gossec L. Validation of a numerical rating scale to assess functional impairment in hip and knee osteoarthritis: comparison with the WOMAC function scale. Ann Rheum Dis 2011; 70: 7406.
  • 82
    Baron G, Tubach F, Ravaud P, Logeart I, Dougados M. Validation of a short form of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index function subscale in hip and knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2007; 57: 6338.
  • 83
    Whitehouse SL, Lingard EA, Katz JN, Learmonth ID. Development and testing of a reduced WOMAC function scale. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003; 85: 70611.
  • 84
    Yang KG, Raijmakers NJ, Verbout AJ, Dhert WJ, Saris DB. Validation of the short-form WOMAC function scale for the evaluation of osteoarthritis of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007; 89: 506.
  • 85
    Bellamy N, Campbell J, Stevens J, Pilch L, Stewart C, Mahmood Z. Validation study of a computerized version of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities VA3.0 Osteoarthritis Index. J Rheumatol 1997; 24: 24135.
  • 86
    Bellamy N, Campbell J, Hill J. A comparative study of telephone vs on-site completion of the WOMAC 3.0 Osteoarthritis Index. J Rheumatol 2002; 29: 7836.
  • 87
    Bellamy N, Wilson C, Hendrikz J, Whitehouse SL, Patel B, Dennison S, et al. Osteoarthritis Index delivered by mobile phone (m-WOMAC) is valid, reliable, and responsive. J Clin Epidemiol 2011; 64: 18290.
  • 88
    Theiler R, Speilberger J, Bischoff H, Bellamy N, Huber J, Kroesen S. Clinical evaluation of the WOMAC 3.0 OA Index in numeric rating scale format using a computerised touch screen version. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2002; 10: 47981.
  • 89
    Bellamy N, Wilson C, Hendrikz J. Population-based normative values for the Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index and the Australian/Canadian (AUSCAN) hand osteoarthritis index functional subscales. Inflammopharmacology 2010; 18: 18.
  • 90
    Guermazi M, Poiraudeau S, Yahia M, Mezganni M, Fermanian J, Habib Elleuch M, et al. Translation, adaptation and validation of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) for an Arab population: the Sfax modified WOMAC. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2004; 12: 45968.
  • 91
    Xie F, Li SC, Goeree R, Tarride JE, O'Reilly D, Lo NN, et al. Validation of Chinese Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) in patients scheduled for total knee replacement. Qual Life Res 2008; 17: 595601.
  • 92
    Soininen JV, Paavolainen PO, Gronblad MA, Kaapa EH. Validation study of a Finnish version of the Western Ontario and McMasters University Osteoarthritis Index. Hip Int 2008; 18: 10811.
  • 93
    Stucki G, Meier D, Stucki S, Michel BA, Tyndall AG, Dick W, et al. Evaluation of a German version of WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) Arthrosis Index. Z Rheumatol 1996; 55: 409. In German.
  • 94
    Wigler I, Neumann L, Yaron M. Validation study of a Hebrew version of WOMAC in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Clin Rheumatol 1999; 18: 4025.
  • 95
    Salaffi F, Leardini G, Canesi B, Mannoni A, Fioravanti A, Caporali R, et al. Reliability and validity of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index in Italian patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2003; 11: 55160.
  • 96
    Hashimoto H, Hanyu T, Sledge CB, Lingard EA. Validation of a Japanese patient-derived outcome scale for assessing total knee arthroplasty: comparison with Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). J Orthop Sci 2003; 8: 28893.
  • 97
    Bae SC, Lee HS, Yun HR, Kim TH, Yoo DH, Kim SY. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Korean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) and Lequesne osteoarthritis indices for clinical research. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2001; 9: 74650.
  • 98
    Faik A, Benbouazza K, Amine B, Maaroufi H, Bahiri R, Lazrak N, et al. Translation and validation of Moroccan Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index in knee osteoarthritis. Rheumatol Int 2008; 28: 67783.
  • 99
    Thumboo J, Chew LH, Soh CH. Validation of the Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index in Asians with osteoarthritis in Singapore. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2001; 9: 4406.
  • 100
    Escobar A, Quintana JM, Bilbao A, Azkarate J, Guenaga JI. Validation of the Spanish version of the WOMAC questionnaire for patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis: Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Clin Rheumatol 2002; 21: 46671.
  • 101
    Roos EM, Klassbo M, Lohmander LS. WOMAC osteoarthritis index: reliability, validity, and responsiveness in patients with arthroscopically assessed osteoarthritis. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities. Scand J Rheumatol 1999; 28: 2105.
  • 102
    Soderman P, Malchau H. Validity and reliability of Swedish WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index: a self-administered disease-specific questionnaire (WOMAC) versus generic instruments (SF-36 and NHP). Acta Orthop Scand 2000; 71: 3946.
  • 103
    Kuptniratsaikul V, Rattanachaiyanont M. Validation of a modified Thai version of the Western Ontario and McMaster (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index for knee osteoarthritis. Clin Rheumatol 2007; 26: 16415.
  • 104
    Basaran S, Guzel R, Seydaoglu G, Guler-Uysal F. Validity, reliability, and comparison of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index and Lequesne algofunctional index in Turkish patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Clin Rheumatol 2010; 29: 74956.
  • 105
    Tuzun EH, Eker L, Aytar A, Daskapan A, Bayramoglu M. Acceptability, reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Turkish version of WOMAC osteoarthritis index. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2005; 13: 2833.
  • 106
    Escobar A, Quintana JM, Bilbao A, Arostegui I, Lafuente I, Vidaurreta I. Responsiveness and clinically important differences for the WOMAC and SF-36 after total knee replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2007; 15: 27380.
  • 107
    Brazier J, Harper R, Munro J, Walters S, Snaith M. Generic and condition-specific outcome measures for people with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology (Oxford) 1999; 38: 8707.
  • 108
    McConnell S, Kolopack P, Davis AM. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC): a review of its utility and measurement properties. Arthritis Rheum 2001; 45: 45361.
  • 109
    Bombardier C, Melfi C, Paul J, Hawker G, Wright J, Coyte P. Comparison of a generic and a disease-specific measure of pain and physical function after knee replacement surgery. Med Care 1995; 33 Suppl: AS13144.
  • 110
    Davis A, Badley E, Beaton D, Kopec J, Wright J, Young N, et al. Rasch analysis of the Western Ontario McMaster (WOMAC) Osteoarthritis Index: results from community and arthroplasty samples. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56: 107683.
  • 111
    Wolfe F, Kong SX. Rasch analysis of the Western Ontario McMaster questionnaire (WOMAC) in 2,205 patients with osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and fibromyalgia. Ann Rheum Dis 1999; 58: 5638.
  • 112
    Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Bellamy N, et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant states in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the patient acceptable symptom state. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64: 347.
  • 113
    Marx R, Stump T, Jones E, Wickiewicz T, Warren R. Development and evaluation of an activity rating scale for disorders of the knee. Am J Sports Med 2001; 29: 2138.
  • 114
    Rick W. Knee injury outcomes measures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2009; 17: 319.
  • 115
    Hambly K. The use of the Tegner Activity Scale for articular cartilage repair of the knee: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011; 19: 60414.
  • 116
    Frobell RB, Roos EM, Roos HP, Ranstam J, Lohmander LS. A randomized trial of treatment for acute anterior cruciate ligament tears. N Engl J Med 2010; 363: 33142.
  • 117
    Naal FD, Impellizzeri FM, Leunig M. Which is the best activity rating scale for patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009; 467: 95865.
  • 118
    Frobell RB, Svensson E, Gothrick M, Roos EM. Self-reported activity level and knee function in amateur football players: the influence of age, gender, history of knee injury and level of competition. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2008; 16: 7139.
  • 119
    Bengtsson J, Mollborg J, Werner S. A study for testing the sensitivity and reliability of the Lysholm knee scoring scale. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1996; 4: 2731.
  • 120
    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: 7305.
  • 121
    Dunbar MJ, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L. Appropriate questionnaires for knee arthroplasty: results of a survey of 3,600 patients from The Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001; 83: 33944.
  • 122
    Fransen M, Edmonds J. Reliability and validity of the EuroQol in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Rheumatology (Oxford) 1999; 38: 80713.
  • 123
    Stucki G, Sangha O, Stucki S, Michel BA, Tyndall A, Dick W, et al. Comparison of the WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) Osteoarthritis Index and a self-report format of the self-administered Lequesne-Algofunctional index in patients with knee and hip osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 1998; 6: 7986.
  • 124
    Angst F, Ewert T, Lehmann S, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G. The factor subdimensions of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) help to specify hip and knee osteoarthritis: a prospective evaluation and validation study. J Rheumatol 2005; 32: 132430.
  • 125
    Chesworth BM, Mahomed NN, Bourne RB, Davis AM. Willingness to go through surgery again validated the WOMAC clinically important difference from THR/TKR surgery. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61: 90718.
  • 126
    Davis AM, Lohmander LS, Wong R, Venkataramanan V, Hawker GA. Evaluating the responsiveness of the ICOAP following hip or knee replacement. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2010; 18: 10435.
  • 127
    Theiler R, Bischoff-Ferrari HA, Good M, Bellamy N. Responsiveness of the electronic touch screen WOMAC 3.1 OA Index in a short term clinical trial with rofecoxib. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2004; 12: 9126.
  • 128
    Tubach F, Ravaud P, Baron G, Falissard B, Logeart I, Bellamy N, et al. Evaluation of clinically relevant changes in patient reported outcomes in knee and hip osteoarthritis: the minimal clinically important improvement. Ann Rheum Dis 2005; 64: 2933.