IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0214746.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Availability of specific tools to assess patient reported outcomes in hip arthroplasty in Spain. Identifying the best candidates to incorporate in an arthroplasty register. A systematic review and standardized assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Jorge Arias-de la Torre
  • Elisa Puigdomenech
  • Jose M Valderas
  • Jonathan P Evans
  • Vicente Martín
  • Antonio J Molina
  • Nuria Rodríguez
  • Mireia Espallargues

Abstract

Purpose: 1) To systematically review the available scientific literature regarding specific instruments developed and/or tested in a Spanish population, to assess these PROMs in hip arthroplasty; 2) to carry out a standardized assessment of their measurement properties; and 3) to identify the best tools for use in Spain in an arthroplasty registry context. Methods: A systematic review of PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE and CINHAL was done. Furthermore, a standardized assessment of the questionnaires identified using the Evaluating the Measurement of Patient-Reported Outcomes (EMPRO) tool was performed. All developments, validation and studies aiming to assess the measurement properties of PROMs in hip arthroplasty in the Spanish population were included. Data from the questionnaires on metric properties was taken into account to identify the best candidates for inclusion in a register. Results: A total of 853 documents were found. After screening title and abstract, 13 full text documents were reviewed and 8 questionnaires adapted and validated to assess some of the aspects of hip arthroplasty in the Spanish population were identified. After the EMPRO assessment, 4 questionnaires showed suitable properties (WOMAC, OAKHQOL, mini-OAKHQOL and PFH). Conclusions: In Spain, there are a few suitable hip-specific questionnaires currently available to assess PROMs in hip arthroplasty surgery. Some of the more widely used questionnaires, like the OHS and HOOS, have not been validated in the Spanish population until now. Identified tools are suitable for use in a clinical context, however their use in an arthroplasty register is more questionable due to the lack of validation studies of the widely used tools in other registers.

Suggested Citation

  • Jorge Arias-de la Torre & Elisa Puigdomenech & Jose M Valderas & Jonathan P Evans & Vicente Martín & Antonio J Molina & Nuria Rodríguez & Mireia Espallargues, 2019. "Availability of specific tools to assess patient reported outcomes in hip arthroplasty in Spain. Identifying the best candidates to incorporate in an arthroplasty register. A systematic review and sta," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-13, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0214746
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214746
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214746
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0214746&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0214746?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0214746. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.