The Munich Shoulder Questionnaire (MSQ): development and validation of an effective patient-reported tool for outcome measurement and patient safety in shoulder surgery

Patient Safety in Surgery

Peter Biberthaler⁴  Ernst Wiedemann³  Viktoria Bogner²  Volker Braunstein²  Marc Beirer⁴  Florian Schmidutz¹ 

[1] Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Munich (LMU), Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377, Munich, Germany;Department of Shoulder Surgery, University of Munich (LMU), Nussbaumstrasse 20, 80336, Munich, Germany;OCM Munich, Steinerstrasse 6, 81369, Munich, Germany;Department of Trauma Surgery, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Ismaningerstrasse 22, 81675, Munich, Germany

关键词: MSQ;    DASH;    SPADI;    CMS;    Self-assessment;    Questionnaire;    Score;    Patient safety;    Shoulder function;    Shoulder outcome;   

Others  :  790356
DOI  :  10.1186/1754-9493-6-9

 received in 2012-04-03, accepted in 2012-05-02,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Outcome measurement in shoulder surgery is essential to evaluate the patient safety and treatment efficiency. Currently this is jeopardized by the fact that most patient-reported self-assessment instruments are not comparable. Hence, the aim was to develop a reliable self-assessment questionnaire which allows an easy follow-up of patients. The questionnaire also allows the calculation of 3 well established scoring systems, i.e. the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), the Constant-Murley Score (CMS), and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Score. The subjective and objective items of these three systems were condensed into a single 30-questions form and validated against the original questionnaires.

Methods

A representative collective of patients of our shoulder clinic was asked to fill in the newly designed self-assessment Munich Shoulder Questionnaire (MSQ). At the same time, the established questionnaires for self-assessment of CONSTANT, SPADI and DASH scores were handed out. The obtained results were compared by linear regression analysis.

Results

Fifty one patients completed all questionnaires. The correlation coefficients of the results were r = 0.91 for the SPADI, r = -0.93 for the DASH and r = 0.94 for the CMS scoring system, respectively.

Conclusions

We developed an instrument which allows a quantitative self-assessment of shoulder function. It provides compatible data sets for the three most popular shoulder function scoring systems by one single, short 30-item. This instrument can be used by shoulder surgeons to effectively monitor the outcome, safety and quality of their treatment and also compare the results to published data in the literature.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Schmidutz et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Angst F, Goldhahn J, Drerup S, Aeschlimann A, Schwyzer HK, Simmen BR: Responsiveness of six outcome assessment instruments in total shoulder arthroplasty. Arthritis Rheum 2008, 59:391-398.
• [2]Beaton DE, Richards RR: Measuring function of the shoulder. A cross-sectional comparison of five questionnaires. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1996, 78:882-890.
• [3]Bot SD, Terwee CB, van der Windt DA, Bouter LM, Dekker J, de Vet HC: Clinimetric evaluation of shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Rheum Dis 2004, 63:335-341.
• [4]Desai AS, Dramis A, Hearnden AJ: Critical appraisal of subjective outcome measures used in the assessment of shoulder disability. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2010, 92:9-13.
• [5]Fayad F, Mace Y, Lefevre-Colau MM: Shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review. Ann Readapt Med Phys 2005, 48:298-306.
• [6]Kirkley A, Griffin S, Dainty K: Scoring systems for the functional assessment of the shoulder. Arthroscopy 2003, 19:1109-1120.
• [7]Paul A, Lewis M, Shadforth MF, Croft PR, van der Windt DA, Hay EM: A comparison of four shoulder-specific questionnaires in primary care. Ann Rheum Dis 2004, 63:1293-1299.
• [8]Roy JS, MacDermid JC, Woodhouse LJ: Measuring shoulder function: a systematic review of four questionnaires. Arthritis Rheum 2009, 61:623-632.
• [9]Constant CR, Murley AH: A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1987, 214:160-164.
• [10]Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C: Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med 1996, 29:602-608.
• [11]Kohn D, Geyer M: The subjective shoulder rating system. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1997, 116:324-328.
• [12]L'Insalata JC, Warren RF, Cohen SB, Altchek DW, Peterson MG: A self-administered questionnaire for assessment of symptoms and function of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1997, 79:738-748.
• [13]Lo IK, Griffin S, Kirkley A: The development of a disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: The Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2001, 9:771-778.
• [14]Richards RR, An KN, Bigliani LU, Friedman RJ, Gartsman GM, Gristina AG, et al.: A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 1994, 3:347-352.
• [15]Roach KE, Budiman-Mak E, Songsiridej N, Lertratanakul Y: Development of a shoulder pain and disability index. Arthritis Care Res 1991, 4:143-149.
• [16]Allom R, Colegate-Stone T, Gee M, Ismail M, Sinha J: Outcome analysis of surgery for disorders of the rotator cuff: a comparison of subjective and objective scoring tools. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009, 91:367-373.
• [17]Beaton DE, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Wright JG, Tarasuk V, Bombardier C: Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity. J Hand Ther 2001, 14:128-146.
• [18]Kocher MS, Horan MP, Briggs KK, Richardson TR, O'Holleran J, Hawkins RJ: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons subjective shoulder scale in patients with shoulder instability, rotator cuff disease, and glenohumeral arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005, 87:2006-2011.
• [19]Boehm D, Wollmerstedt N, Doesch M, Handwerker M, Mehling E, Gohlke F: Development of a questionnaire based on the Constant-Murley-Score for self-evaluation of shoulder function by patients. Unfallchirurg 2004, 107:397-402.
• [20]Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR: Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 1998, 2:i-74.
• [21]Kupsch A, Kessler MA, Weis M, Imhoff A: Development of a questionnaire for patient self-assessment of shoulder function based on the Rowe score. Unfallchirurg 2007, 110:111-115.
• [22]Naal FD, Impellizzeri FM, Wasmer M, Mannion AF, Leunig M: [Schulthess Hip Score (5 items) for assessing disability in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty : Development and validation.]. Orthopade 2010, 39:834-841.
• [23]Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A: Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996, 78:593-600.
• [24]Fayad F, Mace Y, Lefevre-Colau MM, Poiraudeau S, Rannou F, Revel M: Measurement of shoulder disability in the athlete: a systematic review. Ann Readapt Med Phys 2004, 47:389-395.
• [25]Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al.: Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007, 60:34-42.