Skip to main content

The translated Danish version of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) is reliable and responsive



The purpose of this study was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) for use in Denmark and evaluate its test–retest reliability and comparative responsiveness.


Sixty patients (mean age 50 years (range 19–71 years), females 57%) with meniscal injury scheduled for arthroscopic meniscal surgery at a small Danish hospital in the period from September 2017 to February 2018 were included in this study. The WOMET was translated into Danish using forward and backward translation. The WOMET was completed at baseline (pre-surgery), at 3 and 6 months postoperatively. Additionally, reliability was assessed at 3 months and 3 months plus 1 week, for patients with a stable symptom state (global response question) between test and retest. Comparative responsiveness was assessed between the WOMET and the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS4—aggregate score of 4 of the 5 KOOS subscales).


The Danish version of WOMET showed excellent test–retest reliability, intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.88 (95% CI 0.84–0.92) for the total score. The standard error of measurement was 125 points and the minimal detectable change was 347 points (i.e. 8% and 22% of the total score, respectively). The WOMET was responsive with an effect size (ES) of 1.12 at 6 months after surgery, which was comparable to the KOOS4 (ES 1.10).


The Danish version of the WOMET is a reliable and responsive measure of health-related quality of life in patients with meniscal pathology.

Level of evidence

Level II.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3



Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool


Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score


Aggregate Score of 4 of the 5 KOOS Subscales


Intraclass correlation coefficient


Standard error of measurement


Minimal detectable change


Effect size


Patient-reported outcome measure


Activities of daily living


Quality of life


Global response assessment


  1. Abram SGF, Middleton R, Beard DJ, Price AJ, Hopewell S (2017) Patient-reported outcome measures for patients with meniscal tears: a systematic review of measurement properties and evaluation with the COSMIN checklist. BMJ Open 7:e017247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25:3186–3191

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833–1840

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bland JM, Altman DG (1999) Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res 8:135–160

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Celik D, Demirel M, Kus G, Erdil M, Ozdincler AR (2015) Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:816–825

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ebrahimi N, Naghdi S, Ansari NN, Jalaie S, Salsabili N (2020) Statistical validity and reliability of the Persian version of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) according to the COSMIN checklist. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 21:183

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Frobell RB, Roos EM, Roos HP, Ranstam J, Lohmander LS (2010) A randomized trial of treatment for acute anterior cruciate ligament tears. N Engl J Med 363:331–342

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Gelber PE, Torres-Claramunt R, Poggioli F, Perez-Prieto D, Monllau JC (2020) Polyurethane meniscal scaffold: does preoperative remnant meniscal extrusion have an influence on postoperative extrusion and knee function? J Knee Surg.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hefti F, Muller W, Jakob RP, Staubli HU (1993) Evaluation of knee ligament injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1:226–234

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kirkley A, Griffin S, Whelan D (2007) The development and validation of a quality of life-measurement tool for patients with meniscal pathology: the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET). Clin J Sport Med 17:349–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kise NJ, Risberg MA, Stensrud S, Ranstam J, Engebretsen L, Roos EM (2016) Exercise therapy versus arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for degenerative meniscal tear in middle aged patients: randomised controlled trial with two year follow-up. BMJ 354:i3740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL et al (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 19:539–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Muehlhausen W, Doll H, Quadri N, Fordham B, O’Donohoe P, Dogar N et al (2015) Equivalence of electronic and paper administration of patient-reported outcome measures: a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies conducted between 2007 and 2013. Health Qual Life Outcomes 13:167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Peat G, Bergknut C, Frobell R, Joud A, Englund M (2014) Population-wide incidence estimates for soft tissue knee injuries presenting to healthcare in southern Sweden: data from the Skane healthcare register. Arthritis Res Ther 16:R162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Pihl K, Turkiewicz A, Englund M, Lohmander LS, Jorgensen U, Nissen N et al (2018) Change in patient-reported outcomes in patients with and without mechanical symptoms undergoing arthroscopic meniscal surgery: a prospective cohort study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 26:1008–1016

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Roos EM, Roos HP, Ekdahl C, Lohmander LS (1998) Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)—validation of a Swedish version. Scand J Med Sci Sports 8:439–448

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD (1998) Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)—development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 28:88–96

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sgroi M, Daxle M, Kocak S, Reichel H, Kappe T (2018) Translation, validation, and cross-cultural adaption of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) into German. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26:2332–2337

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Sgroi M, Gninka J, Fuchs M, Seitz AM, Reichel H, Kappe T (2020) Chondral lesions at the medial femoral condyle, meniscal degeneration, anterior cruciate ligament insufficiency, and lateral meniscal tears impair the middle-term results after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28:3488–3496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sgroi M, Kocak S, Reichel H, Kappe T (2018) Comparison of 3 knee-specific quality-of-life instruments for patients with meniscal tears. Orthop J Sports Med 6:2325967117750082

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Sihvonen R, Jarvela T, Aho H, Jarvinen TL (2012) Validation of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) for patients with a degenerative meniscal tear: a meniscal pathology-specific quality-of-life index. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94:e65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Sihvonen R, Paavola M, Malmivaara A, Itala A, Joukainen A, Kalske J et al (2020) Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy for a degenerative meniscus tear: a 5 year follow-up of the placebo-surgery controlled FIDELITY (Finnish Degenerative Meniscus Lesion Study) trial. Br J Sports Med 54:1332–1339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Skou ST, Pihl K, Nissen N, Jorgensen U, Thorlund JB (2018) Patient-reported symptoms and changes up to 1 year after meniscal surgery. Acta Orthop 89:336–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tanner SM, Dainty KN, Marx RG, Kirkley A (2007) Knee-specific quality-of-life instruments: which ones measure symptoms and disabilities most important to patients? Am J Sports Med 35:1450–1458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Tegner Y, Lysholm J (1985) Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res 198:43–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J et al (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Tong WW, Wang W, Xu WD (2016) Development of a Chinese version of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool: cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric evaluation. J Orthop Surg Res 11:90

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. van der Wal RJP, Heemskerk BTJ, van Arkel ERA, Mokkink LB, Thomassen BJW (2017) Translation and validation of the Dutch Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool. J Knee Surg 30:314–322

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references


We thank the nurses and surgeons at Silkeborg Regional Hospital for their great help in recruiting patients for this study.


There was no funding source.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



STS, HE and JBT conceived the study. JMC, SLH, HE, CMPM, LRM and JBT recruited patients, translated the WOMET and collected the data. JBT performed the analyses. JMC and JBT drafted the manuscript. All authors provided important intellectual feedback on the manuscript and approved the final version.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jon M. Clementsen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Dr. Skou is an Associate Editor of Journal of Orthopedic & Sports Physical Therapy and has received grants from The Lundbeck Foundation, personal fees from Munksgaard, all of which are outside the submitted work. STS also report to currently be funded by a grant from Region Zealand (Exercise First) and a grant from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No 801790). Dr. Thorlund report a research grant from Pfizer outside the submitted work. The remaining authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

This study was approved exempted for notification to the Regional Ethics Committee according to Danish law. The study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all participants after thorough information about the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 51 KB)

Supplementary file2 (PDF 136 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Clementsen, J.M., Skou, S.T., Hansen, S.L. et al. The translated Danish version of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) is reliable and responsive. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 29, 4278–4285 (2021).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:


  • KOOS
  • Meniscal tear
  • Quality of life
  • Translation
  • Validation