ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2020
The Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score is a responsive primary outcome measure: an evaluation of the Dutch version including minimally important change.
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Home-Based Digital Exercise Program for Patients After Open Repair of Acute Achilles Tendon Rupture: Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2026Trial
- Fear of Reinjury Is Associated With Worse Physical Function Measured by PROMIS Following Minimally Invasive Achilles Rupture Repair.Foot & ankle orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Patient-Centered Outcomes After Minimally Invasive Internal Splinting Versus Open Achilles Tendon Repair: Comparable Clinically Meaningful Recovery at 12 Months.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Functional outcomes following minimally invasive Achilles rupture repair: a retrospective comparative study of PARS and midsubstance speedbridge techniques.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2025Article
- Establishment of the Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) for the Achilles Tendon Total Rupture Score in a Swedish Population.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Validity and reliability of the Thai version of the Achilles tendon total rupture score.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Article
- Cross-Culturally Adapted Versions of Patient Reported Outcome Measures for the Lower Extremity.International journal of sports physical therapy · 2023Article
- Psychological Factors Change During the Rehabilitation of an Achilles Tendon Rupture: A Multicenter Prospective Cohort Study.Physical therapy · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAim of this study was to evaluate the responsiveness of the Dutch version of the Achilles tendon Total Rupture Score (ATRS-NL).
methodsPatients (N = 47) completed the ATRS-NL at 3 and 6 months after Achilles tendon rupture (ATR). Additionally, they filled out the Euroqol-5D-5L (EQ-5D-5L) and Global Rating of Change Score (GRoC). Effect sizes (ES) and standardized response means (SRM) were calculated. The anchor-based method for determining the minimally important change (MIC) was used. GRoC and improvement on the items mobility and usual activities on the EQ-5D-5L served as external criteria. The scores on these anchors were used to categorize patients' physical functioning as improved or unchanged between 3 and 6 months after ATR. Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis was performed, with the calculation of the area under the ROC curve (AUC) and the estimation of MIC values using the optimal cut-off points.
resultsThere was a large change (ES: 1.58) and good responsiveness (SRM: 1.19) of the ATRS-NL between 3 and 6 months after ATR. Using ROC analysis, the MIC values ranged from 13.5 to 28.5 for reporting improvement on EQ-5D-5L mobility and GRoC, respectively. The AUC of improvement on mobility and improvement on GRoC were > 0.70.
conclusionThe ATRS-NL showed good responsiveness in ATR patients between 3 and 6 months after injury. Use of this questionnaire is recommended in clinical follow-up and longitudinal research of ATR patients. MIC values of 13.5 and 28.5 are recommended to consider ATR patients as improved and greatly improved between 3 and 6 months after ATR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.