Advertisement

Validation study of the Forgotten Joint Score-12 as a universal patient-reported outcome measure

  • Mikio Matsumoto
  • Tomonori BabaEmail author
  • Yasuhiro Homma
  • Hideo Kobayashi
  • Hironori Ochi
  • Takahito Yuasa
  • Henrik Behrend
  • Kazuo Kaneko
Original Article • HIP - ARTHROPLASTY

Abstract

Purpose

The Forgotten Joint Score-12 (FJS-12) is for patients to forget their artificial joint and is reportedly a useful patient-reported outcome tool for artificial joints. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the FJS-12 is as useful as the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) or the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ) in Japan.

Methods

All patients who visited our hospital’s hip joint specialists following unilateral THA from August 2013 to July 2014 were evaluated. Medical staff members other than physicians administered three questionnaires. Items evaluated were (1) the reliability of the FJS-12 and (2) correlations between the FJS-12 and the total and subscale scores of the WOMAC or JHEQ.

Results

Of 130 patients, 22 were excluded. Cronbach’s α coefficient was 0.97 for the FJS-12. The FJS-12 showed a significantly lower score than the WOMAC or JHEQ (p < 0.01). The FJS-12 was moderately correlated with the total WOMAC score (r = 0.522) and its subscale scores for “stiffness” (r = 0.401) and “function” (r = 0.539) and was weakly correlated with the score for “pain” (r = 0.289). The FJS-12 was favorably correlated with the total JHEQ score (r = 0.686) and its subscale scores (r = 0.530–0.643).

Conclusion

The FJS-12 was correlated with and showed reliability similar to that of the JHEQ and WOMAC. The FJS-12, which is not affected by culture or lifestyle, may be useful in Japan.

Keywords

Forgotten Joint Score-12 Patient-reported outcome Total hip arthroplasty WOMAC score JHEQ score 

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Caton J, Prudhon JL (2011) Over 25 years survival after Charnley’s total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 35(2):185–188PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hungerford MW, Hungerford DS, Jones LC (2009) Outcome of uncemented primary femoral stems for treatment of femoral head osteonecrosis. Orthop Clin North Am 40(2):283–289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lingard E, Hashimoto H, Sledge C (2000) Development of outcome research for total joint arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci 5(2):175–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Plominski J, Kwiatkowski K (2008) Cemented primary total arthroplasty for acetabular protrusion in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil 10(1):26–34PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Matsumoto T, Kaneuji A, Hiejima Y, Sugiyama H, Akiyama H, Atsumi T, Ishii M, Izumi K, Ichiseki T, Ito H, Okawa T, Ohzono K, Otsuka H, Kishida S, Kobayashi S, Sawaguchi T, Sugano N, Nakajima I, Nakamura S, Hasegawa Y, Fukuda K, Fujii G, Mawatari T, Mori S, Yasunaga Y, Yamaguchi M (2012) Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ): a patient-based evaluation tool for hip-joint disease. The Subcommittee on Hip Disease Evaluation of the Clinical Outcome Committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association. J Orthop Sci 17(1):25–38PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    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(12):1833–1840PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Seki T, Hasegawa Y, Ikeuchi K, Ishiguro N, Hiejima Y (2013) Reliability and validity of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association hip disease evaluation questionnaire (JHEQ) for patients with hip disease. J Orthop Sci 18(5):782–787CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Behrend H, Giesinger K, Giesinger JM, Kuster MS (2012) The “forgotten joint” as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure. J Arthroplasty 27 (3):430-436 e431Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Giesinger JM, Kuster MS, Behrend H, Giesinger K (2013) Association of psychological status and patient-reported physical outcome measures in joint arthroplasty: a lack of divergent validity. Health Qual Life Outcomes 11(64):64PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25(24):3186–3191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Basaran S, Guzel R, Seydaoglu G, Guler-Uysal F (2010) Validity, reliability, and comparison of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index and Lequesne algofunctional index in Turkish patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Clin Rheumatol 29(7):749–756CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Konstantinidis GA, Aletras VH, Kanakari KA, Natsis K, Bellamy N, Niakas D (2014) Comparative validation of the WOMAC osteoarthritis and Lequesne algofunctional indices in Greek patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Qual Life Res 23(2):539–548CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nadrian H, Moghimi N, Nadrian E, Moradzadeh R, Bahmanpour K, Iranpour A, Bellamy N (2012) Validity and reliability of the Persian versions of WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index and Lequesne Algofunctional Index. Clin Rheumatol 31(7):1097–1102CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16(3):297–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fowler J, Jarvis P, Chevannes M (2002) Practical statistics for nursing and health care. Wiley, West SussexGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Papathanasiou G, Stasi S, Oikonomou L, Roussou I, Papageorgiou E, Chronopoulos E, Korres N, Bellamy N (2014) Clinimetric properties of WOMAC index in Greek knee osteoarthritis patients: comparisons with both self-reported and physical performance measures. Rheumatol Int 2014:29Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Harris WH (1969) Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 51(4):737–755PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Haverkamp D, Sierevelt IN, van den Bekerom MP, Poolman RW, van Dijk CN, Marti RK (2008) The validity of patient satisfaction as single question in outcome measurement of total hip arthroplasty. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 18(2):145–150CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Soderman P, Malchau H (2001) Is the Harris hip score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? Clin Orthop Relat Res 384(384):189–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    D’Aubigne RM, Postel M (1954) Functional results of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 36-A(3):451–475PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kuribayashi M, Takahashi KA, Fujioka M, Ueshima K, Inoue S, Kubo T (2010) Reliability and validity of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association hip score. J Orthop Sci 15(4):452–458CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Brokelman RB, van Loon CJ, Rijnberg WJ (2003) Patient versus surgeon satisfaction after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85(4):495–498PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lieberman JR, Dorey F, Shekelle P, Schumacher L, Thomas BJ, Kilgus DJ, Finerman GA (1996) Differences between patients’ and physicians’ evaluations of outcome after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 78(6):835–838PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60(1):34–42CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yilmaz O, Gul ED, Bodur H (2014) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Turkish version of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Physical function Short-form (HOOS-PS). Rheumatol Int 34(1):43–49CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mikio Matsumoto
    • 1
  • Tomonori Baba
    • 1
    Email author
  • Yasuhiro Homma
    • 1
  • Hideo Kobayashi
    • 1
  • Hironori Ochi
    • 1
  • Takahito Yuasa
    • 1
  • Henrik Behrend
    • 2
  • Kazuo Kaneko
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryJuntendo University School of MedicineTokyoJapan
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryKantonsspital St.GallenSt. GallenSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations