scholarly journals Peer Review #1 of "Capturing patient-reported area of knee pain: a concurrent validity study using digital technology in patients with patellofemoral pain (v0.2)"

Author(s):  
D Bazett-Jones
PeerJ ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. e4406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Matthews ◽  
Michael S. Rathleff ◽  
Bill Vicenzino ◽  
Shellie A. Boudreau

Background Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is often reported as a diffuse pain at the front of the knee during knee-loading activities. A patient’s description of pain location and distribution is commonly drawn on paper by clinicians, which is difficult to quantify, report and compare within and between patients. One way of overcoming these potential limitations is to have the patient draw their pain regions using digital platforms, such as personal computer tablets. Objective To assess the validity of using computer tablets to acquire a patient’s knee pain drawings as compared to paper-based records in patients with PFP. Methods Patients (N = 35) completed knee pain drawings on identical images (size and colour) of the knee as displayed on paper and a computer tablet. Pain area expressed as pixel density, was calculated as a percentage of the total drawable area for paper and digital records. Bland–Altman plots, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Pearson’s correlation coefficients and one-sample tests were used in data analysis. Results No significant difference in pain area was found between the paper and digital records of mapping pain area (p = 0.98), with the mean difference = 0.002% (95% CI [−0.159–0.157%]). A very high agreement in pain area between paper and digital pain drawings (ICC = 0.966 (95% CI [0.93–0.98], F = 28.834, df = 31, p < 0.001). A strong linear correlation (R2 = 0.870) was found for pain area and the limits of agreement show less than ±1% difference between paper and digital drawings. Conclusion Pain drawings as acquired using paper and computer tablet are equivalent in terms of total area of reported knee pain. The advantages of digital recording platforms, such as quantification and reporting of pain area, could be realized in both research and clinical settings.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Martinez-Cano ◽  
Daniel Vernaza-Obando ◽  
Julián Chica ◽  
Andrés Mauricio Castro

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to translate to Spanish the patellofemoral pain and osteoarthritis subscale of the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS-PF) and validate this Spanish version of a disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for patellofemoral pain. Results The KOOS-PF was translated to Spanish and sixty patients with patellofemoral pain and/or osteoarthritis accepted to complete the questionnaire. 1-week later 58 patients answered the questions again for the test–retest reliability validation and finally 55 patients completed 1-month later for the responsiveness assessment. The Spanish version showed very good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.93) and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.82). Responsiveness was confirmed, showing a strong correlation with the global rating of change (GROC) score (r 0.64). The minimal detectable change was 11.1 points, the minimal important change was 17.2 points, and there were no floor or ceiling effects for the score.


2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (7) ◽  
pp. 489-495 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Furness ◽  
Scott Johnstone ◽  
Wayne Hing ◽  
Allan Abbott ◽  
Mike Climstein

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document