Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery · 2011
Responsiveness of the EQ-5D in patients with proximal humeral fractures.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Olerud Per, Tidermark Jan, Ponzer Sari, Ahrengart Leif, Bergström Gunnar
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the internal and external responsiveness of the EuroQol EQ-5D (EuroQol Group, Rotterdam, The Netherlands) health status component, defined as the instrument's ability to capture clinically important changes in patients with a proximal humeral fracture within the context of a prospective study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: To evaluate the internal responsiveness of the EQ-5D, the observed change and the standardized response mean (SRM) in relation to the change in the EQ-5D(index) score were calculated. To calculate external responsiveness, an external criterion (EC) was constructed by using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and logistic regression analysis were used in the evaluation.
RESULTS: The mean change score from prefracture status to the 4-month follow-up for the EQ-5D was -20.9 and the corresponding SRM was 0.90, indicating good internal responsiveness. The clearly improved or clearly deteriorated patients according to the EC (DASH) reported change scores of approximately 12 points in the EQ-5D, corresponding to moderately strong SRMs, which, together with the results of the ROC analyses and logistic regression, indicated a good external responsiveness.
CONCLUSION: The EQ-5D displayed good internal and external responsiveness in patients with proximal humeral fractures and can be recommended for use as a quality of life measure in patients with this particular injury.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: To evaluate the internal responsiveness of the EQ-5D, the observed change and the standardized response mean (SRM) in relation to the change in the EQ-5D(index) score were calculated. To calculate external responsiveness, an external criterion (EC) was constructed by using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and logistic regression analysis were used in the evaluation.
RESULTS: The mean change score from prefracture status to the 4-month follow-up for the EQ-5D was -20.9 and the corresponding SRM was 0.90, indicating good internal responsiveness. The clearly improved or clearly deteriorated patients according to the EC (DASH) reported change scores of approximately 12 points in the EQ-5D, corresponding to moderately strong SRMs, which, together with the results of the ROC analyses and logistic regression, indicated a good external responsiveness.
CONCLUSION: The EQ-5D displayed good internal and external responsiveness in patients with proximal humeral fractures and can be recommended for use as a quality of life measure in patients with this particular injury.