Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Spanish version of the Oxford Hip Score in patients with hip osteoarthritis

Readability Analysis of Spanish-Language Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Orthopaedic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly used to quantify patient symptomatology when assessing intervention effectiveness as well as to guide patient-centered health-care management and research. Previous studies have analyzed the readability of PROMs used in orthopaedics in the English language; however, the readability of PROMs used in orthopaedics in the Spanish language has not been evaluated. Given the increasing number of Spanish-speaking individuals seeking orthopaedic care in the United States, it is imperative that PROMs are at an adequate reading level for patients to answer appropriately in their native language. This study aimed to assess the readability of publicly available Spanish-language PROMs used in orthopaedics.

METHODS

Searches of the PubMed, Google Scholar, and Embase databases were conducted to identify publicly available Spanish-language versions of PROMs used in orthopaedics. Additionally, the PROMIS Health Organization was contacted to obtain Spanish-language versions of the PROMIS (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System) questionnaires. A total of 42 Spanish-language PROMs were identified and included in this study. The text of each PROM was inserted into multilingual readability software (legible.es), which analyzed the readability of each PROM using the Fernández Huerta and Índice de Legibilidad de Flesch-Szigriszt (INFLESZ) readability formulas. The mean and standard deviation (SD) of the raw readability scores were calculated for the PROMs. The percentage of PROMs at or below the 6th-grade reading level was also calculated.

RESULTS

The mean readability of PROMs using the INFLESZ formula was at a 7th to 10th-grade reading level (mean = 63, SD = 16), and the mean readability using the Fernández Huerta formula was 68 (SD = 15). On average, 57% of the PROMs used in orthopaedics were at or below the INFLESZ 6th-grade readability level.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately half of Spanish-language PROMs used in orthopaedics are written at a reading level that does not meet the National Institutes of Health and the American Medical Association recommendations at or below the 6th-grade level. PROM developers and translators should consider the importance of readability when translating PROMs, to maximize their use and efficacy among orthopaedic patients speaking that language.

Cross-Culturally Adapted Versions of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for the Lower Extremity

Background

A large number of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been developed in the English language for various lower extremity orthopaedic pathologies. Twenty different PROMs were recommended for 15 specific musculoskeletal lower extremity pathologies or surgeries. However, the availability of cross-culturally adapted versions of these recommended PROMs is unknown.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to identify the cross-culturally adapted versions of recommended PROMs for individuals experiencing orthopedic lower extremity pathologies or undergoing surgeries, and to identify the psychometric evidence that supports their utilization.

Study design

Literature Review.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane, CINAHL, SPORTDisucs and Scopus were searched for cross-culturally adapted translated studies through May 2022. The search strategy included the names of the 20 recommended PROMs from previous umbrella review along with the following terms: reliability, validity, responsiveness, psychometric properties and cross-cultural adaptation. Studies that presented a non-English language version of the PROM with evidence in at least one psychometric property to support its use were included. Two authors independently evaluated the studies for inclusion and independently extracted data.

Results

Nineteen PROMS had cross-culturally adapted and translated language versions. The KOOS, WOMAC, ACL-RSL, FAAM, ATRS, HOOS, OHS, MOXFQ and OKS were available in over 10 different language versions. Turkish, Dutch, German, Chinese and French were the most common languages, with each language having more than 10 PROMs with psychometric properties supporting their use. The WOMAC and KOOS were both available in 10 languages and had all three psychometric properties of reliability, validity, and responsiveness supporting their use.

Conclusion

Nineteen of the 20 recommended instruments were available in multiple languages. The PROM most frequently cross-culturally adapted and translated were the KOOS and WOMAC. PROMs were most frequently cross-culturally adapted and translated into Turkish. International researchers and clinicians may use this information to more consistently implement PROMs with the most appropriate psychometric evidence available to support their use.

Level of evidence

3a.

Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric validation of the Indonesian version of the Oxford Hip Score

Aims

The aim of this study was to perform a cross-cultural adaptation of Oxford Hip Score (OHS) to Indonesian, and to evaluate its psychometric properties.

Methods

We performed a cross-cultural adaptation of Oxford Hip Score into Indonesian language (OHS-ID) and determined its internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, floor-ceiling effect, responsiveness, and construct validity by hypotheses testing of its correlation with Harris Hip Score (HHS), vsual analogue scale (VAS), and Short Form-36 (SF-36). Adults (> 17 years old) with chronic hip pain (osteoarthritis or osteonecrosis) were included.

Results

A total of 125 patients were included, including 50 total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients with six months follow-up. The OHS questionnaire was translated into Indonesian and showed good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.89) and good reliability (intraclass correlation = 0.98). The standard error of measurement value of 2.11 resulted in minimal detectable change score of 5.8. Ten out of ten (100%) a priori hypotheses were met, confirming the construct validity. A strong correlation was found with two subscales of SF-36 (pain and physical function), HHS (0.94), and VAS (-0.83). OHS-ID also showed good responsiveness for post-THA series. Floor and ceiling effect was not found.

Conclusion

The Indonesian version of OHS showed similar reliability and validity with the original OHS. This questionnaire will be suitable to assess chronic hip pain in Indonesian-speaking patients.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):765–772.

Validation of the Spanish version of the Goodman score in total hip arthroplasty

PURPOSE

Currently, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are the standard instruments used to compare arthroplasty results. Goodman et al. recently published a well-constructed scale with excellent psychometric properties that can be quickly administered. The main objective of our study was to translate, culturally adapt, and validate a Spanish version of the Goodman questionnaire in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

The original Goodman scale was translated into Spanish and cross-culturally adapted. Then, the data from this version were tested for psychometric quality. We designed a cross-sectional study for data collection. This study enrolled 2 institutions. Patients who underwent hip replacement due to primary osteoarthritis secondary to dysplasia between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2019 were included. A total of 153 patients were contacted twice to record the Goodman and Oxford hip scales (OHS) to assess the validity of the questionnaire. Reliability was tested using the Cronbach's alpha, Concordance using 3 test: intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), and the Bradley-Blackwood F test. The spearman correlation was used to asses correlation between the OHS and the Spanish-adapted Goodman scale.

RESULTS

The overall satisfaction after THA was reported to be "very satisfied" by 137 patients (75%), and only 14 patients reported some degree of dissatisfaction (6%). The improvement in quality of life was reported to be "more than I ever dreamed possible" by 41% patients. Cronbach's alpha was acceptable, reaching a coefficient of 0.95 (95% confidence interval, 0.82-1). No statistical difference (t test, p = 0.55) was found in the original version, with great internal validity. Test re-test concordance was optimal among the 3 tests used. A moderate correlation was found between the OHS and the Spanish-adapted Goodman scale.

CONCLUSION

The Spanish version of the Goodman questionnaire in THA is a reliable, consistent, and feasible scale to evaluate patient satisfaction and improvement in the quality of life in Spanish speakers.

Can the minimal clinically important difference be determined in a French-speaking population with primary hip replacement using one PROM item and the Anchor strategy?

BACKGROUND

The impact of surgery on the patient is classically assessed on pre- and post-treatment scores. However, it is increasingly recommended to rank these results according to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), using either the data distribution method or the anchor method, latter consisting in an extra question specifically targeting the patient's improvement. MCIDs vary between populations and, to the best of our knowledge; there have been no investigations in France regarding this in the context of total hip replacement (THR). Therefore, we conducted a prospective study in a population with THR to determine: 1) whether MCID scores in France were comparable to those reported in the data from the international literature; 2) whether a general item taken from a different score could serve as an anchor; and 3) whether an item from the actual questionnaire itself could serve as an anchor.

HYPOTHESIS

When pre- and post-treatment scores are available, an item from the questionnaire itself can serve as an anchor for MCID.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In a prospective observational study, 123 primary THR patients (69 male, 54 female), out of 150 initially included, completed the 5 domains of the HOOS hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score and the Oxford-12 questionnaire, preoperatively and at 6-12 months. The MCID was calculated via the distribution-based and the anchor-based methods. Two Oxford items (questions 1 and 2) and 2 HOOS items (questions S1 and Q4) were used as anchors, as well as a supplementary question on improvement and the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS).

RESULTS

At a mean 10.12±1.2 months' follow-up [range, 6.5-11.9 months], the Oxford-12 score increased from 19±8 [3-35] to 40±10 [8-48] (p<0.001), all HOOS components demonstrated improvement, and the FJS at the final follow-up was 71±29 [0-100]. The general items (Oxford question 1 and HOOS question Q4) were more discriminating than the joint-specific items (Oxford question 2 and HOOS question S1). Based on results from the 3 anchors (improvement rated 1 to 5, Oxford question 1 and HOOS question Q4), 3 to 5 patients showed deterioration, 5 to 6 were unchanged, 30 to 40 were slightly improved, and 73 to 80 were improved by THR. The mean MCID on both distribution and anchor methods was 9 [5.5-12] for Oxford-12, 20 [12-27] for HOOS symptoms, 26 [10-36] for HOOS pain, 22 [11.5-28] for HOOS function, 26 [13-34] for HOOS sport and 22 [14-28] for HOOS quality of life.

DISCUSSION

The MCID for the Oxford-12 and HOOS scores in a French population was comparable to data from the past literature. Using a score item as an anchor to define improvement is possible, but only if a general item is used.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; prospective study without control group.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

NCT04057651.

Evidence for the validity of a patient-based instrument for assessment of outcome after revision knee arthroplasty

AIMS

To estimate the measurement properties for the Oxford Knee Score (OKS) in patients undergoing revision knee arthroplasty (responsiveness, minimal detectable change (MDC-90), minimal important change (MIC), minimal important difference (MID), internal consistency, construct validity, and interpretability).

METHODS

Secondary data analysis was performed for 10,727 patients undergoing revision knee arthroplasty between 2013 to 2019 using a UK national patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) dataset. Outcome data were collected before revision and at six months postoperatively, using the OKS and EuroQol five-dimension score (EQ-5D). Measurement properties were assessed according to COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 9,219 patients had complete outcome data. Mean preoperative OKS was 16.7 points (SD 8.1), mean postoperative OKS 29.1 (SD 11.4), and mean change in OKS + 12.5 (SD 10.7). Median preoperative EQ-5D index was 0.260 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.055 to 0.691), median postoperative EQ-5D index 0.691 (IQR 0.516 to 0.796), and median change in EQ-5D index + 0.240 (IQR 0.000 to 0.567). Internal consistency was good with Cronbach's α 0.88 (baseline) and 0.94 (post-revision). Construct validity found a high correlation of OKS total score with EQ-5D index (r = 0.76 (baseline), r = 0.83 (post-revision), p < 0.001). The OKS was responsive with standardized effect size (SES) 1.54 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.51 to 1.57), compared to SES 0.83 (0.81 to 0.86) for the EQ-5D index. The MIC for the OKS was 7.5 points (95% CI 5.5 to 8.5) based on the optimal cut-off with specificity 0.72, sensitivity 0.60, and area under the curve 0.66. The MID for the OKS was 5.2 points. The MDC-90 was 3.9 points. The OKS did not demonstrate significant floor or ceiling effects.

CONCLUSION

This study found that the OKS was a useful and valid instrument for assessment of outcome following revision knee arthroplasty. The OKS was responsive to change and demonstrated good measurement properties. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):627-634.

A cycling and education intervention for the treatment of hip osteoarthritis: A quality improvement replication programme

Objectives:

The Cycling against Hip Pain programme is a 6-week exercise and education treatment pathway for people with hip osteoarthritis. Preliminary results of the Cycling against Hip Pain programme found significant improvements in clinical and patient-reported outcome measures for patients referred from primary care. This article evaluates the effectiveness of the changes made to the pathway in a quality improvement replication programme.

Methods:

The replicated Cycling against Hip Pain programme was delivered between February 2018 and September 2019 in a region of England with a high percentage of adults aged over 65 years. All participants were referred from the orthopaedic outpatient department of the funding hospital (secondary care). The programme was delivered at a local leisure centre and combined 30 min of education on osteoarthritis with 30 min of progressive static cycling, once a week for 6 weeks.

Results:

The participants on the replicated Cycling against Hip Pain programme did not differ from the original cohort in terms of age or pre-programme weight, however, presented with worse hip symptoms at baseline. Consistent with the findings from the original cohort, participants demonstrated significant improvements to their Oxford Hip Score, 30-s chair stand performance, Timed Up and Go score, Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score function and pain, EQ5D health rating, EQ5D-5L score and pain at rest and on weight bearing. In addition, participants reported an increase in knowledge, confidence and motivation to exercise.

Conclusion:

A 6-week cycling and education intervention for the treatment of hip osteoarthritis provided benefits to function, pain and quality of life for patients referred from secondary care. These results are consistent with findings from patients who were referred from primary care and further support the potential of the pathway in the conservative management of hip osteoarthritis.

The cement-in-cement technique is a reliable option in hip arthroplasty revision surgery: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The cement-in-cement technique for revision hip arthroplasty has many potential advantages and has recently gained widespread interest but still lacks evidence to support it. Our aim was to examine the surgical and patient-reported outcomes after cement-in-cement revision hip arthroplasty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched up to February 2019 for original studies reporting the outcomes of revision hip arthroplasty surgeries using the cement-in-cement technique. The methodological quality was assessed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies scale.

RESULTS

Sixteen non-comparative studies met the eligibility criteria, comprising 1899 hips in 1856 patients (72.2 mean age, 37% male), with a mean follow-up of 7.2 years. Most studies reported only primary revisions and focused on the stem component. Intraoperative complications such as femoral or acetabular fractures (5.3%) were low and easily manageable with no relevant sequelae, as were dislocation rates (2.8% of uncomplicated events and 1.6% of cases requiring re-revision). Failure (considered if there was aseptic loosening of the cement-in-cement revised component, 2%), re-revision (9.3%), implant survival and late complication rates were favourable. Functional patient-reported outcomes showed an overall improvement above the minimal clinically important difference at final follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The cement-in-cement technique is a viable option for hip arthroplasty revision surgery with low intraoperative and late complication rates, dislocations and immediate post-operative morbidity, resulting in good functional patient-reported outcomes and favourable medium-term implant survival.

Mapping analysis to predict EQ-5D-5 L utility values based on the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) questionnaires in the Spanish population suffering from lower limb osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

The EQ-5D-5 L is a quality-of-life questionnaire based on individuals' preferences that is widely employed for cost-effectiveness analysis. Given the current demand for mapping algorithms to directly assign "utilities", this study aimed to generate different mapping models for predicting EQ-5D-5 L utility values based on scores of the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Oxford Knee Score (OKS) questionnaires provided by patients suffering from hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA), respectively, and to assess the predictive capability of these functions.

METHODS

This was a prospective, observational study. Following the criteria of the American Rheumatism Association, 361 patients with hip OA and 397 with knee OA from three regions in Spain were included. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed through the EQ-5D-5 L general questionnaire and the OHS and OKS specifically for lower limb OA. Based on the scores on the OHS and OKS questionnaires, EQ-5D-5 L utilities were estimated using 4 models: ordinary least squares (OLS), Tobit, generalized linear model (GLM), and beta regression (Breg). The models were validated on the same patients after 6 months: the mean absolute error (MAE) and mean squared error (MSE) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI), mean values of standard errors (SE), intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and Bland-Altman plots were obtained.

RESULTS

The lowest MAEs were obtained using GLM and Breg models, with values of 0.1103 (0.0993-0.1214) and 0.1229 (0.1102-0.1335) for hip OA, and values of 0.1127 (0.1014-0.1239) and 0.1141 (0.1031-0.1251) for knee OA. MSE values were also lower using GLM and Breg. ICCs between predicted and observed values were around or over the 0.8 cut-off point. Bland-Altman plots showed an acceptable correlation, but precision was lower for subjects with worse HRQoL, which was also evident when comparing MAEs of the bottom and top halves of the utilities scale. Predictive equations for utilities based on OHS/OKS scores were proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

The OHS and OKS scores allow for estimating EQ-5D-5 L utility indexes for patients with hip and knee OA, respectively, with adequate validity and precision. GLM and Breg produce the best predictions. The predictive power of proposed equations is more consistent for subjects in better health condition.

Impact of lower limb osteoarthritis on health-related quality of life: A cross-sectional study to estimate the expressed loss of utility in the Spanish population

Objective

Osteoarthritis of the lower limb (OALL) worsens health-related quality of life (HRQL), but this impact has not been quantified with standardized measures. We intend to evaluate the impact of OALL on HRQL through measures based on individual preferences in comparison to the general population.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was designed. A total of 6234 subjects aged 50 years or older without OALL were selected from the Spanish general population (National Health Survey 2011–12). An opportunistic sample of patients aged 50 years or older diagnosed with hip (n = 331) or knee osteoarthritis (n = 393), using the American Rheumatism Association criteria, was recruited from six hospitals and 21 primary care centers in Vizcaya, Madrid and Tenerife between January and December 2015. HRQL was measured with the EQ-5D-5L, and the results were transformed into utility scores. Sociodemographic variables (age, sex, social group, cohabitation), number of chronic diseases, and body mass index were considered. The clinical stage of OALL was collected using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index and the Oxford hip score and Oxford knee score. Generalized linear models were constructed using the utility index as the dependent variable.

Results

HRQL expressed by OALL patients was significantly worse than this of the general population. After adjustment for sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, the mean utility loss was -0.347 (95% CI: -0.390, -0.303) for osteoarthritis of the hip and -0.295 (95% CI: -0.336, -0.255) for osteoarthritis of the knee. OALL patients who were treated at a hospital had an additional utility loss of -0.112 (95% CI: -0.158, -0.065).

Conclusion

OALL has a great impact on HRQL. People with OALL perceive a utility loss of approximately 0.3 points compared to the general population without osteoarthritis, which is very high in relation to the utility loss reported for other chronic diseases and for arthritis in general.

EQ-5D-5L utilities per health states in Spanish population with knee or hip osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to obtain utilities by means of EQ-5D-5L for different health states in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) or hip osteoarthritis (HOA) in Spain, and to compare these values with those used in foreign studies with the aim of discussing their transferability for their use in economic evaluations conducted in Spain.

METHODS

Primary study: Observational prospective study of KOA or HOA patients in Spain. Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were collected to characterize the sample. Utilities were elicited using the EQ-5D-5L questionnaire. ANOVA and bivariable analyses were conducted to identify differences between health states.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Using the bibliographic databases NSH EED and CEA Registry, we conducted searches of model-based cost utilities analyses of technologies in KOA or HOA patients. Health states and utilities were extracted and compared with values obtained from the Spanish sample.

RESULTS

Three hundred ninety-seven subjects with KOA and 361 subjects with HOA were included, with average utilities of 0.544 and 0.520, respectively. In both samples, differences were found in utilities according to level of pain, stiffness and physical function (WOMAC) and severity of symptoms (Oxford scales), so that the worst the symptoms, the lower the utilities. The utilities after surgery were higher than before surgery. Due to limitations from our study related to sample size and observational design, it was not possible to estimate utilities for approximately half the health states included in the published models because they were directly related to specific technologies. For almost 100% of health states of the selected studies we obtained very different utilities from those reported in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge this is the first article with detailed utilities estimated using the EQ-5D-5L in Spain for KOA and HOA patients. In both populations, utilities are lower for worse health states in terms of level of pain, stiffness and physical function according to WOMAC, and according to the Oxford scales. Most utilities obtained from the Spanish sample are lower than those reported in the international literature. Further studies estimating utilities from local populations are required to avoid the use of foreign sources in economic evaluations.

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

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.

Structural and physical-functional deficits in lower limbs with fractures and treated surgically

Abstract Introduction: A fracture is a traumatic bone injury that can occur from a variety of causes. Although the repercussions of fractures on the musculoskeletal system are documented, studies with more comprehensive outcomes and later stages of injury are still scarce. Objective: To evaluate the structural and physical-functional adaptations in individuals who suffered unilateral lower limb fractures treated surgically. Methods: Thirty-two patients of both genders, aged between 18 and 59 years, with a diagnosis of unilateral fracture of the lower limb and hospital discharge of at least one year, participated in the study. The affected lower limb was compared to the healthy lower limb of all participants using the outcome measures: vastus lateral muscle thickness (ultrasonography), knee extension and flexion strength (isokinetic dynamometer), ankle dorsiflexion range of motion of the distance from the foot to the wall) and functional fitness of the lower limb (single and triple horizontal jump test). Results: Statistically significant differences were found between the limbs affected and not affected in the measurements of muscle thickness (p = 0.0001), knee extension force (p = 0.0094), dorsiflexion amplitude (p = 0.0004) and functional performance (p = 0.0094, single jump and = 0.0114, triple jump). In all significant outcomes, the values of the affected limb were smaller than that of the non-affected limb. The peak torque of the knee flexor muscles did not show a statistically significant difference between limbs (p = 0.0624). Conclusion: Individuals who have undergone a surgically treated unilateral fracture of the lower limb present important structural and physical-functional late changes in relation to the non-affected limb.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of a patient-reported hip outcome score

PURPOSE

We aimed to perform psychometric testing for the translated Oxford Hip Score (OHS) for use as a recommended tool to measure treatment outcomes.

METHODS

The original English questionnaire was translated and culturally validated using the instrument developer's guidelines and the ISPOR principles of good practice. One hundred patients completed the form together with the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and EQ-5D-5 L. Fifty patients repeated the form after two days. They were suffering from hip osteoarthritis, had had hip replacement or underwent osteosynthesis for a fracture of the trochanteric region.

RESULTS

The questionnaire had a high degree of reliability with a Cronbach α of 0.917 at the initial completion and 0.917 at the second testing, respectively. The two results were strongly positive and significantly correlated (Pearson's r = 0.947; p < 0.001). The OHS was strongly and significantly correlated with the HHS (Pearson's r = 0.880 initial and r = 0.840 s; p < 0.001) and strongly, positive and significantly correlated with the EQ-5D-5 L VAS (Pearson's r = 0.614 initial and r = 0.704 s; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that the translation of the OHS is a reliable, reproducible and valid measure of function in patients who undergo treatment for hip pathology.