Scores and sores: Exploring patient‐reported outcomes for knee evaluation in orthopaedics, sports medicine and rehabilitation

Author:

Królikowska Aleksandra1ORCID,Reichert Paweł2ORCID,Senorski Eric Hamrin3,Karlsson Jon4ORCID,Becker Roland56ORCID,Prill Robert56ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Ergonomics and Biomedical Monitoring Laboratory, Department of Physiotherapy, Faculty of Health Sciences Wroclaw Medical University Wroclaw Poland

2. Department of Orthopaedics, Traumatology and Hand Surgery, Faculty of Medicine Wroclaw Medical University Wroclaw Poland

3. Unit of Physiotherapy, Department of Health and Rehabilitation, Institute of Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy University of Gothenburg Gothenburg Sweden

4. Department of Orthopaedics, Sahlgrenska Academy University of Gothenburg Gothenburg Sweden

5. Center of Orthopaedics and Traumatology University Hospital Brandenburg/Havel, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane Brandenburg a.d.H. Germany

6. Faculty of Health Sciences Brandenburg Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane Brandenburg a.d.H. Germany

Abstract

AbstractRecognizing and addressing the controversies surrounding using patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) is crucial for enhancing evaluation standards in clinical studies in orthopedics, sports medicine, and rehabilitation. The article comprehensively described the challenges of using PROMs to evaluate knee conditions in these fields. Apart from defining and characterizing patient‐reported outcomes and their measures, the article discussed controversies around them, such as using them as primary outcomes. It highlighted the importance of standardizing and validating PROMs. Several initiatives taken to improve the selection of appropriate outcomes for clinical research purposes were described. Additionally, the potential of technology, mainly digital health tools and mobile applications, was mentioned in the context of enhancing the collection and analysis of PROMs. The article also raised the issue of the readability of PROMs, defined as the ease with which they can be read and understood by patients. The article concluded that adopting a complementary approach to treatment evaluation by integrating subjective and objective measures is imperative for accurately assessing efficacy. This comprehensive approach provides a more holistic understanding of patient outcomes, forms the foundation for evidence‐based medicine, and informs future healthcare policies. Proactive measures are urgently needed to address concerns and improve the reliability and validity of PROMs for clinical practice and research.Level of Evidencelevel V.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3