Editorial Commentary: Patient-Reported Outcome Measures With Established Clinically Important Outcome Values Should Be Used for Hip Arthroscopy Patients: Sifting Through the White Noise
Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery, ISSN: 0749-8063, Vol: 37, Issue: 10, Page: 3122-3124
2021
- 3Citations
- 1Usage
- 9Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations3
- Citation Indexes3
- Usage1
- Abstract Views1
- Captures9
- Readers9
Article Description
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) are widely used after hip arthroscopy to track postoperative outcomes. With the number of hip arthroscopies performed each year continuing to rise in the United States, it is important to understand which specific PROM is appropriate for use in clinical practice. Clinically important outcome values (CIOVs), including minimal clinically important difference (MCID), patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS), and substantial clinical benefit values, must be determined to allow for score interpretation. Many of the commonly used PROM in hip arthroscopy have CIOVs supporting their use for hip arthroscopy. The selection of an appropriate PROM allows for useful score interpretation at a single time point, as well as changes in score over time, while avoiding response burden to the patient. While the question of “Which PROM should I use?” remains unclear, CIOVs values have been established for the Nonarthritic Hip Score, modified Harris hip score, Hip Outcome Score, and International Hip Outcome Tool. We believe the advantages of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) may outweigh those of the legacy instruments, but future research will be needed to psychometrically prove this!
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749806321005223; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2021.05.036; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85115654002&origin=inward; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34602152; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0749806321005223; https://dsc.duq.edu/faculty/263; https://dsc.duq.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1263&context=faculty; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2021.05.036
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know