PMID- 19405008
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20090630
LR  - 20220411
IS  - 0004-3591 (Print)
IS  - 0004-3591 (Linking)
VI  - 61
IP  - 5
DP  - 2009 May 15
TI  - Measuring shoulder function: a systematic review of four questionnaires.
PG  - 623-32
LID - 10.1002/art.24396 [doi]
AB  - OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the quality and content of the 
      psychometric evidence relating to 4 shoulder disability scales: the Disabilities 
      of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, the Shoulder Pain and 
      Disability Index (SPADI), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, 
      and the Simple Shoulder Test (SST). METHODS: We conducted a structured search 
      using 3 databases (Medline, CINAHL, EMBase). In total, 71 published primary 
      studies were analyzed. A pair of raters conducted data extraction and critical 
      appraisal using structured tools. A descriptive synthesis was performed. RESULTS: 
      Quality ratings of 55% of the studies reviewed reached a level of > or =75%. Most 
      studies suggest that all 4 questionnaires have excellent reliability (intraclass 
      correlation coefficient > or =0.90). The 4 questionnaires are strongly correlated 
      (r >0.70) with each other and with a number of similar indices, and the 
      questionnaires were able to differentiate between different populations and 
      disability levels. The minimal detectable change (MDC) is approximately 9.4 for 
      the ASES, 10.5 for the DASH, and 18 for the SPADI; the minimal clinically 
      important difference (MCID) is approximately 6.4 for the ASES and 10.2 for the 
      DASH, and ranges between 8 and 13 for the SPADI. MDC and MCID have not been 
      defined for the SST. CONCLUSION: The psychometric properties of the ASES, DASH, 
      and SPADI have been shown to be acceptable for clinical use. Conversely, some 
      properties of the SST still need be evaluated, particularly the absolute errors 
      of measurement. Overall, validation studies have focused on less clinically 
      relevant properties (construct validity or group reliability) than estimates of 
      MDC and MCID.
FAU - Roy, Jean-Sebastien
AU  - Roy JS
AD  - McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. jean-sebastien.roy.1@ulaval.ca
FAU - MacDermid, Joy C
AU  - MacDermid JC
FAU - Woodhouse, Linda J
AU  - Woodhouse LJ
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Review
PT  - Systematic Review
PL  - United States
TA  - Arthritis Rheum
JT  - Arthritis and rheumatism
JID - 0370605
SB  - IM
MH  - *Disability Evaluation
MH  - Humans
MH  - Language
MH  - Psychometrics
MH  - Reproducibility of Results
MH  - Shoulder/*physiopathology
MH  - *Surveys and Questionnaires
RF  - 64
EDAT- 2009/05/01 09:00
MHDA- 2009/07/01 09:00
CRDT- 2009/05/01 09:00
PHST- 2009/05/01 09:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2009/05/01 09:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2009/07/01 09:00 [medline]
AID - 10.1002/art.24396 [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Arthritis Rheum. 2009 May 15;61(5):623-32. doi: 10.1002/art.24396.