Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29372384›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2018

Validation of the German version of the Kujala score in patients with patellofemoral instability: a prospective multi-centre study.

D Dammerer, M C Liebensteiner, U M Kujala, K Emmanuel, S Kopf, F Dirisamer, J M Giesinger

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

D DammererDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.
M C LiebensteinerDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, Anichstraße 35, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria. michael.liebensteiner@i-med.ac.at.
U M KujalaFaculty of Sport and Health Sciences, University of Jyväskylä, Liikunta Building, P.O. Box 35 (L), FI 40014, Jyväskylä, Finland.
K EmmanuelDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Krankenhaus Barmherzige Schwestern, Seilerstätte 4, 4020, Linz, Austria.
S KopfCenter for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité-University Medicine Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Germany.
F DirisamerOrthopädie and Sportchirurgie, Karl-Leitl-Straße 1, 4048, Linz-Puchenau, Austria.
J M GiesingerInnsbruck Institute of Patient-centered Outcome Research (IIPCOR), Dr.Stumpf Straße 56, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Kujala score is the most frequently used questionnaire for patellofemoral disorders like pain, instability or osteoarthritis. Unfortunately, we are not aware of a validated German version of the Kujala score. The aim of our study was the translation and linguistic validation of the Kujala score in German-speaking patients with patella instability and the assessment of its measurement characteristics. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe German Kujala score was developed in several steps of translation. In addition to healthy controls, the Kujala German was assessed in consecutive patients undergoing reconstruction of the medial patellofemoral ligament for recurrent patellar dislocations. Pre-op, 6 and 12 months postop the patients completed the Kujala German score, the KOOS, the Lysholm score, a VAS Pain, and the SF-12v2 scores. In addition, there was a Kujala German Score retest preop after a 1-week interval.

resultsWe found high reliability in terms of internal consistency for the Kujala score (Cronbach's alpha = 0.87). Convergent validity with the KOOS (symptom r = 0.65, pain r = 0.78, ADL r = 0.74, sports/recreation r = 0.84, quality of life r = 0.70), the Lysholm score (r = 0.88) and the SF-12 physical component summary score (r = 0.79) and VAS pain (r = - 0.71) was also very high. Discriminant validity in terms of correlation with the SF-12 mental component summary Score was satisfactory (r = 0.14).

conclusionsIn conclusion, the German version of the Kujala score proved to be a reliable and valid instrument in the setting of a typical patellofemoral disease treated with a standard patellofemoral procedure.

Indexed as

Joint InstabilityArthralgiaHumansKnee JointLigaments, ArticularPatellofemoral JointSeverity of Illness IndexSurveys and QuestionnairesKujala patellofemoral scoreKujala scorePatellofemoral instabilityPatellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS)QuestionnaireValidation

Identifiers

PMID29372384
PMCPMC5854722

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.