ArticleHaemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia
Male Range of Motion Norms in the Haemophilia Joint Health Score Underrepresent the Severity of Joint Damage in Females.
Article in Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
introductionJoint bleeding causes haemarthropathy, impacting quality of life. Joint outcomes research in bleeding disorders has focused on males; however, females are also affected. The Haemophilia Joint Health Score (HJHS) is a validated physical exam measure of haemarthropathy, which includes flexion and extension loss parameters derived from male range of motion (ROM) norms. Female ROM norms are not included in the HJHS instruction manual.
aimTo determine whether using female ROM norms, rather than standard male ROM norms, yields revised HJHS values in females with bleeding disorders.
methodsParticipants assigned female at birth with bleeding disorders and clinical HJHS exams at the University of Colorado were included in analysis. HJHS was calculated by standard methods, including flexion and extension loss measures comparing joint angles to the contralateral side and to normative male and female ROM angles. The frequency and magnitude of Score Revisions when applying female ROM norms were calculated and compared across individual joints (ankle, knee, elbow), joint pairs, and participants.
resultsThe analysis included 187 females with 448 HJHS exams. At least 1 Score Revision occurred when applying female ROM norms in 92/187 participants (49.2%) across 184/448 exams (41.1%). When using the female rather than male ROM norms, the 6-joint total HJHS revision was 0.67 ± 1.29 (mean ± standard deviation) points higher (p < 0.001). Applying male ROM norms underestimated the total HJHS in 136 (33.8%) exams. Ankles joints were most frequently underestimated.
conclusionApplying male ROM values to HJHS calculations in females with bleeding disorders underestimates haemarthropathy, particularly in the ankle.
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.