Asymptomatic population reference values for three knee patient-reported outcomes measures: evaluation of an electronic data collection system and implications for future international, multi-centre cohort studies.

OBJECTIVES: The aim was to assess whether the Knee Society Score, Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) were comparable in asymptomatic, healthy, individuals of different age, gender and ethnicity, across two remote continents. The purpose of this study was to establish normal population values for these scores using an electronic data collection system. HYPOTHESIS: There is no difference in clinical knee scores in an asymptomatic population when comparing age, gender and ethnicity, across two remote continents. METHODS: 312 Australian and 314 Canadian citizens, aged 18-94 years, with no active knee pain, injury or pathology in the ipsilateral knee corresponding to their dominant arm, were evaluated. A knee examination was performed and participants completed an electronically administered questionnaire covering the subjective components of the knee scores. The cohorts were age- and gender-matched. Chi-square tests, Fisher's exact test and Poisson regression models were used where appropriate, to investigate the association between knee scores, age, gender, ethnicity and nationality. RESULTS: There was a significant inverse relationship between age and all assessment tools. OKS recorded a significant difference between gender with females scoring on average 1% lower score. There was no significant difference between international cohorts when comparing all assessment tools. CONCLUSIONS: An electronic, multi-centre data collection system can be effectively utilized to assess remote international cohorts. Differences in gender, age, ethnicity and nationality should be taken into consideration when using knee scores to compare to pathological patient scores. This study has established an electronic, normal control group for future studies using the Knee society, Oxford, and KOOS knee scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level II.

An international, multicenter cohort study comparing 6 shoulder clinical scores in an asymptomatic population.

HYPOTHESIS: The study purpose was to assess 6 shoulder patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) values in asymptomatic, healthy, pathology-free individuals. We hypothesized that there would be no difference in PROM values in pathology-free individuals when considering sex, age, ethnicity, and geographical location. METHODS: Electronic questionnaires were completed by 635 individuals (323 Australians and 312 Canadians) without dominant shoulder pathology for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score; Constant-Murley Shoulder Score (CSS); Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS); University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder score; Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI); and Stanmore Percentage of Normal Shoulder Assessment (SPONSA). Shoulder range of motion and strength were assessed. RESULTS: No difference was identified between subjective-only and subjective-objective PROMs. Handedness and a current elbow or wrist problem were not associated with differences in PROM values. Poorer PROM values were associated with a history of an inactive shoulder problem and increasing age. Female participants tended to report similar or poorer PROM scores. No significant difference was found between ethnicities. Geographical location was associated with differences in the ASES shoulder score, UCLA shoulder score, and SPADI but not the CSS, SPONSA, and OSS. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in sex, age, and geographical location will affect PROM shoulder scores in pathology-free individuals and should be taken into consideration when PROMs are being used to compare patient outcomes. This study has established normative values for the ASES shoulder score, CSS, OSS, UCLA shoulder score, SPADI, and SPONSA. Future studies assessing a pathologic patient cohort should perform comparisons against a sex- and age-matched control cohort, ideally sourced from the same geographical location.

Delayed diagnosis of developmental dislocation of the hip: the Western Australian experience.

BACKGROUND: A delay in the diagnosis of developmental dislocation of the hip has many long-term consequences. This retrospective study was undertaken in order to establish an incidence of late-presenting developmental dislocation of the hip in Western Australia, and investigate possible causes for missed diagnoses. METHOD: Data were collected retrospectively from 1 January to 31 December 2010. Theatre records were searched for operative descriptions including the words 'arthrogram hip', 'EUA hip', 'closed reduction hip', 'open reduction hip' and 'spica'. Medical records were checked to establish the demographic details and background history of cases identified. Delayed diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) was defined as a dislocated hip requiring operative reduction, diagnosed at age greater than 3 months. RESULTS: Seventeen children with 21 dislocated hips were identified. Age at diagnosis ranged from 6 months to 5 years. Girls accounted for 88.2% (15/17) and the left hip was involved two-thirds of the time (14/21). Bilateral dislocations were found in four children. CONCLUSION: This study has identified an incidence of late-presenting developmental hip dislocation of approximately three times the previously established rate. Possible reasons for this are explored. Additional retrospective audit is now underway, and changes are already in place to ensure that infants with DDH born in Western Australia are identified and treated as early as possible.