A novel patient-reported outcome measure for anterior cruciate ligament injury: evaluating the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of Japanese anterior cruciate ligament questionnaire 25
- 584 Downloads
Despite objectively good results, up to 70 % of individuals may not return to their pre-injury level of sports activity after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction surgery. Although psychological responses have been shown to affect outcomes after ACL injury, an appropriate means of measuring their effects, in addition to functional status, has not been determined. The purpose of this study was to develop a patient-reported questionnaire for measuring psychological factors associated with outcomes after ACL injury and to evaluate its reliability, validity, and responsiveness.
After item analysis based on the results of two pilot studies and a short relevance assessment, 25 questionnaire items were selected for the Japanese Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury Questionnaire 25 (JACL-25) and assessed for validity, reliability, and responsiveness in subjects with ACL injury.
The JACL-25 had no floor or ceiling effects and no confounding factors. A Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of 0.981 and a Guttman split-half coefficient of 0.983 indicated excellent reliability. Large standardized response means (1.30–1.62) and effect sizes (0.96–1.51) from the preoperative to postoperative period indicated good responsiveness. Construct structures were created, and these items were separated into three domains. Strong correlations between the JACL-25 and the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form (r s = −0.86), Lysholm Score (r s = −0.73), and Tegner Activity Scale (r s = −0.65) indicated good concurrent validity of the JACL-25.
The present study demonstrated that the JACL-25 was valid, reliable, and responsive enough to evaluate psychological factors associated with outcomes in individuals with ACL injuries.
Level of evidence
Diagnostic study, Level III.
KeywordsAnterior cruciate ligament injury Questionnaires Validation study JACL-25
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.Akaike H (1973) Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In: Petrov BN, Csaki F (eds) Second international symposium on information theory. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, pp 267–281Google Scholar
- 5.Chmielewski TL, Zeppieri G Jr, Lentz TA, Tillman SM, Moser MW, Indelicato PA, George SZ (2011) Longitudinal changes in psychosocial factors and their association with knee pain and function after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Phys Ther 91:1355–1366CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 6.Cohen J (2013) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic Press Inc, LondonGoogle Scholar
- 8.Doi T, Akai M, Endo N, Fujino K, Iwaya T (2013) Dynamic change and influence of osteoporotic back pain with vertebral fracture on related activities and social participation: evaluating reliability and validity of a newly developed outcome measure. J Bone Miner Metab 31:663–673CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Lentz TA, Zeppieri G Jr, George SZ, Tillman SM, Moser MW, Farmer KW, Chmielewski TL (2015) Comparison of physical impairment, functional, and psychosocial measures based on fear of reinjury/lack of confidence and return-to-sport status after ACL reconstruction. Am J Sports Med 43:345–353CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Magnussen RA, Granan LP, Dunn WR, Amendola A, Andrish JT, Brophy R, Carey JL, Flanigan D, Huston LJ, Jones M, Kaeding CC, McCarty EC, Marx RG, Matava MJ, Parker RD, Vidal A, Wolcott M, Wolf BR, Wright RW, Spindler KP, Engebretsen L (2010) Cross-cultural comparison of patients undergoing ACL reconstruction in the United States and Norway. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 18:98–105CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 22.Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC (2010) The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res 19:539–549CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 23.Sakamoto Y (1992) Categorical data analysis by AIC. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
- 25.Shirado O, Doi T, Akai M, Fujino K, Hoshino Y, Iwaya T (2007) An outcome measure for Japanese people with chronic low back pain: an introduction and validation study of Japan low back pain evaluation questionnaire. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:3052–3059Google Scholar