Validity of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ) for Japanese patients with labral tear.

The Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ) was created for patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and to evaluate the conditions of patients with hip disease. Nevertheless, the validity of the JHEQ for patients with hip labral tears remains unclear. Therefore, we validated the JHEQ in patients with labral tears. There were 51 patients (mean age 44.5, range 18-60 years; 31 women). Thirty-two patients had right-sided tears, 29 underwent hip arthroscopy, 32 had femoroacetabular impingement and 15 had developmental hip dysplasia. Five PROMs included in the JHEQ were evaluated using test-retest methods. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software according to the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments checklist. The intra-class correlation coefficient (1, 2) of all JHEQ scores (84 points) was 0.88 and Cronbach's α was 0.94. Bland-Altman analysis revealed good test-retest reliability for the JHEQ. The Spearman's rank test, including the SF-36 subscale, showed a high correlation with physical functioning [1, 0.67 (P < 0.01); 2, 0.65 (P < 0.01)], body pain [1, 0.54 (P < 0.01); 2, 0.53 (P < 0.01)] and physical component summary [1, 0.55 (P < 0.01); 2, 0.55 (P < 0.01)]. The value of minimal important change (22.9) was higher than that of smallest detectable change (3.21), suggesting that the JHEQ has adequate responsiveness. We demonstrated the reliability, validity and responsiveness of the JHEQ in Japanese patients with hip labral tears. JHEQ is a valid assessment tool not only for patients with hip osteoarthritis or osteonecrosis but also for those with hip labral tears.

Exploring the validation of a Japanese version of the International Hip Outcome Tool 12: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness.

BACKGROUNDS: The International Hip Outcome Tool 12 (iHOT12) was authorized by the Multicenter Arthroscopy of the Hip Outcomes Research Network (MAHORN). iHOT12 is increasingly being adopted in orthopedic studies to report patient outcomes. This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the International Hip Outcome Tools "iHOT12J", and to establish its reliability, validity, and responsiveness. METHODS: To assess test-retest reliability, an identical set of patients reported outcome measures with five qualitative scoring measures including iHOT12; these were filled out by each patient twice. Reliability was explored using Cronbachss alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient. The Bland-Altman plot was used to explore the absolute agreement. To evaluate validity, we examined the relationships between SF36 and iHOT12. Responsiveness was assessed by comparing the smallest detectable change to the minimal important change by applying an anchor-based approach. RESULTS: Fifty patients (51 joints) were analyzed from March 2016 to October 2017 in Japanese four facility. The Cronbach α coefficient was 0.90 and the average value of intraclass coefficient (ICC) was 0.89. Bland-Altman plot analysis showed a solid agreement. Regarding the validity, the Spearman rank correlation coefficients were strong with PF (r = 0.69, p < 0.01), BP (r = 0.71, p < 0.01) and PCS (r = 0.69, p < 0.01). The smallest detectable change (3.19) was smaller than the minimum important change (12.40). CONCLUSIONS: We developed iHOT12J, which seems to show sufficient reliability, validity, and responsiveness. We believe that this patient reported outcome measure is beneficial in studying Japanese patients with femoroacetabular impingement.

Japanese version of the international PROMs "Vail Hip Score": Reliability, validity, and responsiveness according to the COSMIN checklist.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to develop a Japanese version of the international PROMs "Vail Hip Score (Vail10)" and to establish its reliability, validity, and responsiveness with COSMIN check-list. METHODS: The study was conducted from March 2016 to October 2017 and included 46 patients totaling 47 joints. Disorders included 30 cases of FAI (55%), 13 cases of DDH (28%), and 4 others (8%). We administered an identical set of PROMs (5 measures: Japanese-version iHOT12 (pilot draft), Japanese-version Vail10, Japanese-version Oxford Hip Score, JHEQ, and SF36) twice in these subjects. We determined interclass correlation coefficients for the first and second round [ICC(1,2)], as well as the Cronbach α coefficient for patient responses to each of the 10 items in Vail10. In addition, we determined Spearman rank correlation coefficients of Vail10, OHS, JHEQ, satisfaction VAS, the 8 subscales of SF36, and the 3 QOL summary scores. RESULTS: ICC for the total score of all 10 items in Vail10 was 0.96. Cronbach α coefficient was 0.96. Bland-Altman plot analysis showed a solid agreement. Regarding the validity, Spearman rank correlation coefficients, only satisfaction VAS, and SF36 subscales of PF and BP had r > 0.45 (p < 0.01 in both administration rounds). The SDC (1.32) was smaller than the MIC (8.14). CONCLUSIONS: After developing the Japanese version of Vail10, we examined its Reliability, validity, and responsiveness by administering the measure to patients with acetabular labral tear. Correlations were strong and demonstrated the efficacy of the Japanese version of Vail10.

A comparative study of the effects of bucillamine and salazosulfapyridine in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

Bucillamine (Buc), developed in Japan, is a disease-modifying antirheumatic drug (DMARD) which has been used to treat numerous patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in Japan and Korea with favorable results. However, it has not been used globally. In the present study, we compared the timing of onset of efficacy and the usefulness of this drug with that of the globally accepted agent salazosulfapyridine (SASP). There were 26 patients in the Buc group and 23 in the SASP group. We compared changes in the number of swollen joints, number of painful joints, duration of morning stiffness, grip strength, levels of inflammatory marker [erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP)], rheumatoid factor (RF), physician's rating by visual analogue scale (VAS), patient's rating of pain, patient's overall rating (VAS), and improvement according to European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria (DAS28-CRP, DAS28-ESR) in these two groups of patients. Both Buc and SASP were shown to be efficacious within 3 months after the start of treatment. Both drugs were found to be suitable as first-line treatment of early RA. Signs of efficacy tended to occur earlier with Buc than with SASP, and Buc also tended to have higher efficacy than SASP.