RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SEVERITY AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE OF SYMPTOMS IN OSTEOARTHRITIS

被引：53

作者：

BELLAMY, N

WELLS, G

CAMPBELL, J

机构：

[1] Department of Rheumatology, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario

[2] Division of Biometrics, Health and Welfare Canada, Ottawa, Ontario

来源：

CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY | 1991年 / 10卷 / 02期

关键词：

CLINICAL METROLOGY; IMPORTANCE; OSTEOARTHRITIS;

D O I：

10.1007/BF02207652

中图分类号：

R5 [内科学];

学科分类号：

1002 ; 100201 ;

摘要：

Seventeen patients with primary osteoarthritis of the knee were evaluated with respect to the severity and clinical importance of pain, stiffness and physical function during the conduct of a double-blind randomized controlled trial of flurbiprofen SR versus diclofenac sodium SR using the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index. Mean importance scores were similar for items within the same dimension as well as between items in different dimensions. In general, low levels of correlation were noted between the severity and importance of symptoms. Analysis of individual WOMAC items within a given subscale indicated that, although highly correlated, they differed from one another. Factor analysis further supported the contention that scores from items within a subscale could be summated into subscale scores. These observations are of importance in the weighting and aggregation of items within discrete dimensions and have the potential for reducing sample size requirements for clinical trials in osteoarthritis.

引用

页码：138 / 143

页数：6

共 22 条

[1]

Bombardier C., Tugwell P., Sinclair A., Dok C., Anderson G., Buchanan W.W., Preference for endpoint measures in clinical trials: results of structured workshops, J Rheumatol, 9, (1982)

[2]

Spector T.D., Epidemiological aspects of studying outcome in rheumatoid arthritis, Br J Rheumatol, 27, pp. 5-11, (1988)

[3]

Altman R.D., Meenan R.F., Hochberg M.C., Bole G.G., Brandt K., Cooke T.D.V., Greenwald R.A., Howell D.S., Kaplan D., Koopman W.J., Mankin H., Mikkelsen W.M., Moskowitz R., Sokoloff L., An approach to developing criteria for the clinical diagnosis and classification of osteoarthritis: A status report of the American Rheumatism Association Diagnostic Subcommittee on Osteoarthritis, J Rheumatol, 10, (1983)

[4]

Bellamy N., Buchanan W.W., Outcome measurement in osteoarthritis clinical trials: the case for standardisation, Clin Rheumatol, 3, (1984)

[5]

Feinstein A.R., Scientific decisions for data and hypotheses, Clinical Epidemilogy — The Architecture of Clinical Research, pp. 515-517, (1985)

[6]

Stewart A.L., Ware J.E., Brook R.H., Advances in the measurement of functional status: Construction of aggregate indexes, Med Care, 19, 5, pp. 473-488, (1981)

[7]

Symthe H.A., Helewa A., Goldsmith C.H., “Independent assessor” and “Pooled Index” as techniques for measuring treatment effects in rheumatoid arthritis, J Rheumatol, 4, (1977)

[8]

Gade H.G., A contribution to the surgical treatment of osteoarthritis of the hip joint: A clinical study. III. Comments on the follow-up examinations and the evaluation of the therapeutic results, Acta Chir Scand, 120, pp. 37-45, (1947)

[9]

Freeman M.A.R., Swanson S.A.V., Todd R.C., Total replacement of the knee using the Freeman-Swanson knee prothesis, Orthop Related Res, 94, pp. 153-170, (1973)

[10]

Bellamy N., Osteoarthritis-An Evaluative Index for Clinical Trials, (1982)

← 1 2 3 →