MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций
Медицинская библиотека · The American journal of knee surgery · 1999

An analysis of sports knee evaluation instruments.

Brinker M R, Garcia R, Barrack R L, Timon S, Guinn S, Fong B

Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

This study examined four commonly used sports knee evaluation instruments to establish normative data. A total of 91 volunteers who had not sought treatment for knee pain or any other knee complaint at any time in the past underwent a detailed medical history and examination of both of their knees. Three numerical systems (Feagin and Blake Knee Score, Lysholm Knee Score, and the Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Disability Assessment) and one nonnumerical system (the International Knee Documentation Committee Quick Knee Profile) were evaluated. A significant difference in the proportion of knees with excellent/normal ratings was seen among the four evaluation systems (P<.0001): Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Disability Assessment, 99.5%; Feagin and Blake Knee Score, 84.6%; Lysholm Knee Score, 84.1%; and the International Knee Documentation Committee Quick Knee Profile, 50.5%. Results showed that three objective component scores for the International Knee Documentation Quick Knee Profile were significantly lower than all other component scores (P<.05). These components included: overall ligament examination, Lachman, and total AP translation. These data may be useful as a baseline by which investigators studying patients following knee reconstructive procedures have a basis for comparison of their results.

Для цитирования: Brinker M R, Garcia R, Barrack R L, Timon S, Guinn S, Fong B. An analysis of sports knee evaluation instruments.. The American journal of knee surgery. 1999.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.