RESUMO
OBJETIVO: Muitos instrumentos têm sido propostos para avaliar o joelho, tornando muitas vezes difícil a sua escolha. Entre esses instrumentos destacam-se as escalas Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOS) e International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), mas ainda não é claro qual delas seria melhor para avaliar o joelho de portadores da síndrome da dor femoropatelar (SDFP). O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar as escalas de avaliação KOS e IKDC para verificar qual delas seria mais apropriada na identificação de acometimento nos portadores da SDFP. MÉTODOS: O estudo incluiu 31 portadores da SDFP, com idade entre 18 e 39 anos (24,29 ± 4,09), sendo 27 sujeitos do sexo feminino e quatro, do masculino. Todos os sujeitos foram submetidos às escalas KOS e IKDC em duas ocasiões. A segunda aplicação serviu como prova de confiabilidade (PCKOS e PCIKDEC). A análise de correlação estatística entre as duas escalas foi realizada com os testes de Spearman e Wilcoxon, considerando-se significativo p < 0,05. RESULTADOS: O teste de correlação de Spearman revelou forte correlação entre KOS e PCKOS (r = 0,99; p < 0,001) e IKDC e PCIKDC (r = 0,96; p < 0,001). Houve uma moderada correlação entre KOS e IKDC (r = 0,46; p < 0,01) e PCKOS e PCIKDC (r = 0,55; p < 0,002). O teste de Wilcoxon revelou diferença entre KOS e IKDC (p < 0,001) e entre PCKOS e PCIKDC (p < 0,001). Houve igualdade entre KOS e PCKOS (p > 0,10) e diferença entre IKDC e PCIKDC (p < 0,02). CONCLUSÃO: As escalas KOS e IKDC apresentaram-se confiáveis durante o processo de aplicação nos portadores da SDFP, recebendo a KOS a prova de maior confiabilidade quando comparada ao IKDC.
INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Many instruments have been proposed for the knee assessment, making its choice often difficult. Among these instruments, we can mention the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOS) and the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) scales; however, it is unclear which of them would be better to evaluate the knee of subjects with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS). The objective of this study was to compare the KOS and IKDC scales evaluation to verify which of them would be more appropriate to identify impairment in patients with PFPS. METHODS: The study included 31 PFPS subjects, aged between 18 and 39 years (24.29 ± 4.09); 27 subjects were female and 4 were male. All subjects were submitted to KOS and IKDC scales on the two occasions. The second application served as reliability evidence (PCKOS and PCIKDC).The analysis of statistical correlation between the scales was done with the Spearman and Wilcoxon tests, considering significant p < 0.05. RESULTS: The Spearman correlation test presented strong correlation between KOS and PCKOS (r = 0.99, p < 0.001) and IKDC and PCIKDC (r = 0.96, p < 0.001). There was a weak correlation between KOS and IKDC (r = 0.46, p < 0.01) and PCKOS and PCIKDC (r = 0.55, p < 0.002). The Wilcoxon test revealed differences between KOS and IKDC (p < 0.001) and between PCKOS and PCIKDC (p < 0.001). There was equality between KOS and PCKOS (p > 0.10) and difference between IKDC and PCIKDC (p < 0.02). CONCLUSION: The KOS and IKDC scales were reliable during the application in patients with PFPS, where the KOS received greater reliability when compared to the IKDC.