Common Scales and Checklists in Sports Medicine Research

  • Alberto Grassi
  • Luca Macchiarola
  • Marco Casali
  • Ilaria Cucurnia
  • Stefano Zaffagnini


Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are key tools when performing clinical research, but they must possess particular properties before they are used; moreover during the early stage of study design, attention should be directed to choosing the appropriate outcomes and scales that evaluate a patient population. Thus the purpose of this chapter is to give an overview of commonly used PROMs in sport medicine research and to describe their main features, their properties, and mostly appropriate clinical conditions.


  1. 1.
    Aichroth PM, Cannon WD Jr. International Knee Documentation Committee: knee ligament injury and reconstruction 209 evaluation. Knee surgery current practice. New York: Raven Press; 1992. p. 759–60.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amstutz HC, Sew Hoy AL, Clarke IC. UCLA anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop. 1981;155:7–20.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Angst F, Schwyzer HK, et al. Measures of adult shoulder function. Arthritis Care Res. 2011;63(Suppl 11):S174–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barber-Westin SD, Noyes FR, et al. Rigorous statistical reliability, validity, and responsiveness testing of the Cincinnati knee rating system in 350 subjects with uninjured, injured, or anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knees. Am J Sports Med. 1999;27(4):402–16.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beaton DE, Wright JG, Katz JN, The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group. Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three itemreduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1038–46.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bellamy N. WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index user guide. London: University of Western Ontario; 1995. p. 79.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bellamy N. WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index user guide. Version V. Brisbane: CONROD, The University of Queensland; 2002.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bennett PJ, Patterson C, et al. Development and validation of a questionnaire designed to measure foot-health status. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1998;88:419–28.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bieri D, Reeve R, et al. The Faces Pain Scale for the self-assessment of the severity of pain experienced by children: development, initial validation and preliminary investigation for ratio scale properties. Pain. 1990;41:139–50.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Binkley JM, Stratford PW, et al. The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS): scale development, measurement properties, and clinical application. Phys Ther. 1999;79:371–83.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brophy RH, Beauvais RL, et al. Measurement of shoulder activity level. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;439:101–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brophy RH, Levy B, et al. Shoulder activity level varies by diagnosis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2009;17:1516–21.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Budiman-Mak E, Conrad K, et al. Theoretical model and Rasch analysis to develop a revised Foot Function Index. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27(7):519–27.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Budiman-Mak E, Conrad KJ, et al. The Foot Function Index: a measure of foot pain and disability. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44(6):561–70.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Busija L, Osborne RH, et al. Magnitude and meaningfulness of change in SF-36 scores in four types of orthopaedic surgery. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;6:55.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Celik D. Psychometric properties of the Mayo Elbow Performance Score. Rheumatol Int. 2015;35(6):1015–20.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cella D, Riley W, et al. Initial Adult Health Item Banks and First Wave Testing of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMISTM) network: 2005–2008. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(11):1179–94.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Christensen CP, Althausen PL, Mittleman MA, et al. The nonarthritic hip score: reliable and validated. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;406:75–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chung KC, Pillsbury MS, Walters MR, Hayward RA. Reliability and validity testing of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire. J Hand Surg Am. 1998;23(4):575–87.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Clarsen B, Myklebust G, et al. Development and validation of a new method for the registration of overuse injuries in sports injury epidemiology: the Oslo Sports Trauma Research Centre (OSTRC) Overuse Injury Questionnaire. Br J Sports Med. 2013;47:495–502.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Collins NJ, Misra D, Felson DT, Crossley KM, Roos EM. Measures of knee function: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Short Form (KOOS-PS), Knee Outcome Survey Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADL), Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Activity Rating Scale (ARS), and Tegner Activity Score (TAS). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(Suppl 11):S208–28. Scholar
  22. 22.
    Constant CR, Gerber C, Emery RJ, Sojbjerg JO, Gohlke F, Boileau P. A S186 Angst et al review of the Constant score: modifications and guidelines for its use. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2008;17:355–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;214:160–4. 56.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cook JJ, Cook EA, et al. Validation of the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons Scoring Scales. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2011;50(4):420–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cooney WP, Bussey R, Dobyns JH, Linscheid RL. Difficult wrist fractures. Perilunate fracture-dislocations of the wrist. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;(214):136–47.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Craig CL, Marshall AL, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35(8):1381–95.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Crossley KM, Bennell KL, et al. Analysis of outcome measures for persons with patellofemoral pain: which are reliable and valid? Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85(5):815–22.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Dacombe PJ, Amirfeyz R, Davis T. Patient-reported outcome measures for hand and wrist trauma: is there sufficient evidence of reliability, validity, and responsiveness? Hand (New YorkNY). 2016;11(1):11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Daughton DM, Fix AJ, et al. Maximum oxygen consumption and the ADAPT quality-of life scale. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1982;63:620–2.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dawson J, Doll H, Boller I, et al. The development and validation of a patientreported questionnaire to assess outcomes of elbow surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:466–73.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78:185–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78:593–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A. The assessment of shoulder instability. The development and validation of a questionnaire. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999;81:420–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:63–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dawson J, Rogers K, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A. The Oxford Shoulder Score revisited. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009;129:119–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dreiser R, Maheu E, Guillou GB, Caspard H, Grouin JM. Validation of an algofunctional index for osteoarthritis of the hand. Rev Rhum Engl Ed. 1995;62:43S–53S.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ferreira-Valente MA, Pais-Ribeiro JL, et al. Validity of four pain intensity rating scales. Pain. 2011;152(10):2399–404.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Fix AJ, Daughton DM. Human activity profile professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.; 1988.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Glazer DD. Development and preliminary validation of the Injury-Psychological Readiness to Return to Sport (I-PRRS) Scale. J Athl Train. 2009;44(2):185–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Goldstein CL, Schemitsch E, et al. Comparison of different outcome instruments following foot and ankle trauma. Foot Ankle Int. 2010;31(12):1075–80.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Golightly YM, Devellis RF, et al. Psychometric properties of the foot and ankle outcome score in a community-based study of adults with and without osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Res. 2014;66(3):395–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Halasi T, Kynsburg A, et al. Development of a new activity score for the evaluation of ankle instability. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32:899–908.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hamamoto Y, Ito H, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Japanese version of the new Knee Society Scoring System for osteoarthritic knee with total knee arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci. 2015;20(5):849–53.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Harris WH. 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. 1969;51:737–55.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hasenstein T, Greene T, et al. A 5-year review of clinical outcome measures published in the Journal of the American Podiatric Medical Association and the Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2017;56(3):519–21.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hawker GA, Mian S, et al. Measures of adult pain: Visual Analog Scale for Pain (VAS Pain), Numeric Rating Scale for Pain (NRS Pain), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF MPQ), Chronic Pain Grade Scale (CPGS), Short Form 36 Bodily Pain Scale (SF 36 BPS), and Measure of Intermittent and Constant Osteoarthritis Pain (ICOAP). Arthritis Care Res. 2011;63:S240–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Herdman M, Gudex C, et al. Development and preliminary testing of the new five-level version of EQ-5D (EQ-5D-5L). Qual Life Res. 2011;20(10):1727–36.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hernandez-Sanchez S, Hidalgo MD, et al. Responsiveness of the VISA-P scale for patellar tendinopathy in athletes. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(6):453–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hicks CL, von Baeyer CL, et al. The Faces Pain Scale – Revised: toward a common metric in pediatric pain measurement. Pain. 2001;93:173–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hunt KJ, Hurwit D. Use of patient-reported outcome measures in foot and ankle research. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(16):e118(1–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hunt KJ, Lakey E. Patient-reported outcomes in foot and ankle surgery. Orthop Clin North Am. 2018;49(2):277–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Instruments for collection of orthopaedic quality data; 2016.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL, Harner CD, Kurosaka M, Neyret P, et al. Development and validation of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29:600–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    ISAKOS Scientific Committee, Audigé L, Ayeni OR, Bhandari M, Boyle BW, Briggs KK, Chan K, Chaney-Barclay K, Do HT FM, Fu FH, Goldhahn J, Goldhahn S, Hidaka C, Hoang-Kim A, Karlsson J, Krych AJ, RF LP, Levy BA, Lubowitz JH, Lyman S, Ma Y, Marx RG, Mohtadi N, Marcheggiani Muccioli GM, Nakamura N, Nguyen J, Poehling GG, Roberts LE, Rosenberg N, Shea KP, Sohani ZN, Soudry M, Voineskos S, Zaffagnini S, International Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery and Orthopaedic Sports Medicine. A practical guide to research: design, execution, and publication. Arthroscopy. 201127(4 Suppl):S1–112.Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Jenkinson C, Fitzpatrick R, et al. The Nottingham Health Profile: an analysis of its sensitivity in differentiating illness groups. Soc Sci Med. 1988;27:1411–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Johanson NA, Liang MH, et al. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons lower limb outcomes assessment instruments. Reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-a(5):902–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Kemp JL, Collins NJ, Roos EM, Crossley KM. Psychometric properties of patient-reported outcome measures for hip arthroscopic surgery. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41:2065–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Kennedy CA, Beaton DE, Solway S, McConnell S, Bombardier C. The DASH outcome measure user’s manual. 3rd ed. Toronto: Institute for Work & Health; 2011.Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kersten P, White PJ, et al. Is the pain visual analogue scale linear and responsive to change? An exploration using Rasch analysis. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e99485.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kirkley A, Griffin S, Alvarez C. The development and evaluation of a disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for rotator cuff disease: The Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC). Clin J Sport Med. 2003;13:84–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Kirkley A, Griffin S, et al. Scoring systems for the functional assessment of the shoulder. Arthroscopy. 2003;19(10):1109–20.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Kirkley A, Griffin S, McLintock H, Ng L. The development and evaluation of a disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for shoulder instability: the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI). Am J Sports Med. 1998;26:764–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Kirkley A, Werstine R, Ratjek A, Griffin S. Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of immediate arthroscopic stabilization versus immobilization and rehabilitation in first traumatic anterior dislocations of the shoulder: long-term evaluation. Arthroscopy. 2005;21:55–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Kitaoka HB, Alexander I, et al. Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes. Foot Ankle Int. 1994;15(7):349–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Klassbo M, Larsson E, Mannevik E. Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score: an extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol. 2003;32:46–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Kujala UM, Jaakola LH, Koskinen SK, Taimela S, Hurme M, Nelimarkka O. Scoring of patellofemoral disorders. Arthroscopy. 1993;9:159–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Lee JS, Hobden E, et al. Clinically important change in the visual analogue scale after adequate pain control. Acad Emerg Med. 2003;10(10):1128–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Lequesne M. Indices of severity and disease activity for osteoarthritis. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 1991;20(Suppl 2):48–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Lequesne MG, Mery C, Samson M, Gerard P. Indexes of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip and knee: validation—value in comparison with other assessment tests. Scand J Rheumatol Suppl. 1987;65:85–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Lequesne MG. The algofunctional indices for hip and knee osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol. 1997;24:779–81.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Lippitt SB, Harryman DT, Matsen FA. A practical tool for evaluation of function: the Simple Shoulder Test. In: Matsen FA, Fu FH, Hawkins RJ, editors. The shoulder: a balance of mobility and stability. Rosemont: American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons; 1993. p. 545–59.Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Lo IKY, Griffin S, Kirkley A. The development and evaluation of a disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: The Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS). Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2001;9:771–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Longo G, Franceschi F, Loppini M, Maffulli N, Denaro V. Rating systems for evaluation of the elbow. Br Med Bull. 2008;87(1):131–61.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Lysholm J, Gillquist J. Evaluation of knee ligament surgery results with special emphasis on use of a scoring scale. Am J Sports Med. 1982;10:150–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Macdermid J. Update: the Patient-rated Forearm Evaluation Questionnaire is now the Patient-rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation. J Hand Ther. 2005;18:407–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Martin R, Burdett R, et al. Development of the Foot and Ankle Disability Index (FADI). J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1999;29(1):A32–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Martin RL, Irrgang JJ, et al. Evidence of validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Foot Ankle Int. 2005;26(11):968–83.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Marx RG, Stump TJ, et al. Development and evaluation of an activity rating scale for disorders of the knee. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29(2):213–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Melzack R. The short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire. Pain. 1987;30:191–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Michener LA, McClure PW, Sennett BJ. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section: reliability, validity, and responsiveness. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2002;11(6):587–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Mohtadi NGH, Griffin DR, Pedersen ME, et al. The development and validation of a self-administered quality-of-life outcome measure for young, active patients with symptomatic hip disease: the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33). Arthroscopy. 2012;28(5):595–610.e1.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Morrey BF, An KN. Functional evaluation of the elbow. In: Morrey BF, editor. The elbow and its disorders. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 1993.Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Murray DW, Fitzpatrick R, Rogers K, Pandit H, Beard DJ, Carr AJ, et al. The use of the Oxford Hip and Knee Scores. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89:1010–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Narin S, Unver B, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) Knee Score. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2014;48(3):241–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Nilsdotter AK, Lohmander LS, Klassbo M, Roos EM. Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS): validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003;4:10.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Nilsdotter A, Bremander A. Measures of hip function and symptoms: Harris Hip Score (HHS), Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Lequesne Index of Severity for Osteoarthritis of the Hip (LISOH), and American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) Hip and Knee Questionnaire. Arthritis Care Res. 2011;63:S200–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Nilsson, et al. The Swedish version of OMAS is a reliable and valid outcome measure for patients with ankle fractures. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:109.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Olerud C, Molander H. A scoring scale for symptom evaluation after ankle fracture. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1984;103:190–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Perruccio AV, Stefan Lohmander L, Canizares M, Tennant A, Hawker GA, Conaghan PG, et al. The development of a short measure of physical function for knee OA KOOS-Physical Function Shortform (KOOS-PS): an OARSI/OMERACT initiative. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2008;16:542–50.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Pinsker E, Daniels TR. AOFAS position statement regarding the future of the AOFAS clinical rating systems. Foot Ankle Int. 2011;32(9):841–2.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Ramisetty N, Kwon Y, et al. Patient-reported outcome measures for hip preservation surgery: a systematic review of the literature. J Hip Preserv Surg. 2015;2(1):15–27.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Richards RR, An KN, Bigliani LU, Friedman RJ, Gartsman GM, Gristina AG, et al. A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 1994;3:347–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Richardson J, Sinha K, et al. Modeling the utility of health states with the Assessment of Quality of Life (AQoL) 8D instrument: overview and utility scoring algorithm. Research paper, vol. 63. Melbourne: Centre for Health Economics, Monash University; 2011.Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Roach KE, Budiman-Mak E, Songsiridej N, Lertratanakul Y. Development of a Shoulder Pain and Disability Index. Arthritis Care Res. 1991;4:143–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Robinson JM, Cook JL, et al. The VISA-A questionnaire: a valid and reliable index of the clinical severity of Achilles tendinopathy. Br J Sports Med. 2001;35(5):335–41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Roelofs J, van Breukelen G, et al. Norming of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia across pain diagnoses and various countries. Pain. 2011;152:1090–5.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Rompe JD, Overend TJ, et al. Validation of the Patient-rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation Questionnaire. J Hand Ther. 2007;20(1):3–10.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Roos EM, Brandsson S, et al. Validation of the foot and ankle outcome score for ankle ligament reconstruction. Foot Ankle Int. 2001;22(10):788–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1998;28:88–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Rowan K. The development and validation of a multi-dimensional measure of chronic foot pain: the Rowan Foot Pain Assessment Questionnaire (ROFPAQ). Foot Ankle Int. 2001;22:795–809.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Scott J, Huskisson EC. Graphic representation of pain. Pain. 1976;2(2):175–84.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Scuderi GR, Bourne RB, Noble PC, Benjamin JB, Lonner JH, Scott WN. The New Knee Society Knee Scoring System. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470(1):3–19.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Seeger J, Weinmann S, et al. The Heidelberg Sports Activity Score - a new instrument to evaluate sports activity. Open Orthopaed J. 2013;7:25–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    SooHoo NF, Vyas R, et al. Responsiveness of the foot function index, AOFAS clinical rating systems, and SF-36 after foot and ankle surgery. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27(11):930–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Tegner Y, Lysholm J. Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985;(198):43–9.Google Scholar
  106. 106.
    Thomas JL, Christensen JC, et al. ACFAS Scoring Scale user guide. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2005;44(5):316–35.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Thorborg K, Holmich P, Christensen A, Petersen F, Roos EM. The Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS): development and validation according to the COSMIN checklist. Br J Sports Med. 2011;45:478–91.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    van der Linde JA, van Kampen DA, et al. The Oxford Shoulder Instability Score; validation in Dutch and first-time assessment of its smallest detectable change. J Orthop Surg Res. 2015;10:146.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Walker N, et al. A preliminary development of the Re-Injury Anxiety Inventory (RIAI). Phys Ther Sport. 2010;11(1):23–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, et al. A 12-item short-form health survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34(3):220–33.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30(6):473–83.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Wendel-Vos GCW, Schuit AJ, et al. Reproducibility and relative validity of the short questionnaire to assess health-enhancing physical activity. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:1163e9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Williams GN, Molloy JM, et al. Evaluation of the Sports Ankle Rating System in young, athletic individuals with acute lateral ankle sprains. Foot Ankle Int. 2003;24:274–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Zahiri CA, Schmalzried TP, et al. Assessing activity in joint replacement patients. J Arthroplast. 1998;13(8):890–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Zampelis V, Ornstein E, et al. A simple visual analog scale for pain is as responsive as the WOMAC, the SF-36, and the EQ-5D in measuring outcomes of revision hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 2014;85(2):128–32.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Zwiers R, Weel H, et al. Large variation in use of patient-reported outcome measures: a survey of 188 foot and ankle surgeons. Foot Ankle Surg. 2017. pii: S1268-7731(17)30050-4.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© ISAKOS 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alberto Grassi
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Luca Macchiarola
    • 1
  • Marco Casali
    • 1
  • Ilaria Cucurnia
    • 1
  • Stefano Zaffagnini
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.IIa Clinica Ortopedica e TraumatologicaIRCCS Istituto Ortopedico RizzoliBolognaItaly
  2. 2.Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche e Neuromotorie (DIBINEM)Università di BolognaBolognaItaly
  3. 3.SIGASCOT Arthroscopy CommitteeFlorenceItaly

Personalised recommendations