Development of a Valid and Reliable Knee Articular Cartilage Condition-Specific Study Methodological Quality Score

Overview

Journal Orthop J Sports Med

Specialty Orthopedics

Date 2015 Nov 5

PMID 26535295

Citations 3

Authors

Joshua D Harris

Brandon J Erickson

Gregory L Cvetanovich

Geoffrey D Abrams

Frank M McCormick

Anil K Gupta

Nikhil N Verma

Bernard R Bach Jr

Brian J Cole

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Condition-specific questionnaires are important components in evaluation of outcomes of surgical interventions. No condition-specific study methodological quality questionnaire exists for evaluation of outcomes of articular cartilage surgery in the knee.

Purpose: To develop a reliable and valid knee articular cartilage-specific study methodological quality questionnaire.

Study Design: Cross-sectional study.

Methods: A stepwise, a priori-designed framework was created for development of a novel questionnaire. Relevant items to the topic were identified and extracted from a recent systematic review of 194 investigations of knee articular cartilage surgery. In addition, relevant items from existing generic study methodological quality questionnaires were identified. Items for a preliminary questionnaire were generated. Redundant and irrelevant items were eliminated, and acceptable items modified. The instrument was pretested and items weighed. The instrument, the MARK score (Methodological quality of ARticular cartilage studies of the Knee), was tested for validity (criterion validity) and reliability (inter- and intraobserver).

Results: A 19-item, 3-domain MARK score was developed. The 100-point scale score demonstrated face validity (focus group of 8 orthopaedic surgeons) and criterion validity (strong correlation to Cochrane Quality Assessment score and Modified Coleman Methodology Score). Interobserver reliability for the overall score was good (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC], 0.842), and for all individual items of the MARK score, acceptable to perfect (ICC, 0.70-1.000). Intraobserver reliability ICC assessed over a 3-week interval was strong for 2 reviewers (≥0.90).

Conclusion: The MARK score is a valid and reliable knee articular cartilage condition-specific study methodological quality instrument.

Clinical Relevance: This condition-specific questionnaire may be used to evaluate the quality of studies reporting outcomes of articular cartilage surgery in the knee.

Citing Articles

Antibiotic prophylaxis in foot and ankle surgery: a systematic review of the literature.

Modha M, Morriss-Roberts C, Smither M, Larholt J, Reilly I J Foot Ankle Res. 2018; 11:61.

PMID: 30479666 PMC: 6238341. DOI: 10.1186/s13047-018-0303-0.

Hamstring Autograft versus Patellar Tendon Autograft for ACL Reconstruction: Is There a Difference in Graft Failure Rate? A Meta-analysis of 47,613 Patients.

Samuelsen B, Webster K, Johnson N, Hewett T, Krych A Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017; 475(10):2459-2468.

PMID: 28205075 PMC: 5599382. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-017-5278-9.

Return to sport after the surgical management of articular cartilage lesions in the knee: a meta-analysis.

Krych A, Pareek A, King A, Johnson N, Stuart M, Williams 3rd R Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016; 25(10):3186-3196.

PMID: 27539401 DOI: 10.1007/s00167-016-4262-3.

References

Harris J, Brophy R, Siston R, Flanigan D . Treatment of chondral defects in the athlete's knee. Arthroscopy. 2010; 26(6):841-52. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2009.12.030. View

Hudak P, Amadio P, 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(6):602-8. DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:6<602::AID-AJIM4>3.0.CO;2-L. View

Brun P, Dickinson S, Zavan B, Cortivo R, Hollander A, Abatangelo G . Characteristics of repair tissue in second-look and third-look biopsies from patients treated with engineered cartilage: relationship to symptomatology and time after implantation. Arthritis Res Ther. 2008; 10(6):R132. PMC: 2656234. DOI: 10.1186/ar2549. View

McHorney C, Ware Jr J, Raczek A . The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): II. Psychometric and clinical tests of validity in measuring physical and mental health constructs. Med Care. 1993; 31(3):247-63. DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199303000-00006. View

Harris J, Erickson B, Abrams G, Cvetanovich G, McCormick F, Gupta A . Methodologic quality of knee articular cartilage studies. Arthroscopy. 2013; 29(7):1243-1252.e5. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2013.02.023. View

Fauno P, Nielsen A . Arthroscopic partial meniscectomy: a long-term follow-up. Arthroscopy. 1992; 8(3):345-9. DOI: 10.1016/0749-8063(92)90066-k. View

Minas T, Gomoll A, Rosenberger R, Royce R, Bryant T . Increased failure rate of autologous chondrocyte implantation after previous treatment with marrow stimulation techniques. Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37(5):902-8. DOI: 10.1177/0363546508330137. View

Rudd R, Visco D, Kincaid S, Cantwell H . The effects of beveling the margins of articular cartilage defects in immature dogs. Vet Surg. 1987; 16(5):378-83. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-950x.1987.tb00971.x. View

Hsu J, Liu S, Lee G . Can we trust studies published by authors with financial conflicts? Using the decline of metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty to investigate. J Arthroplasty. 2012; 27(8 Suppl):41-5.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.03.060. View

10.

Knapik D, Harris J, Pangrazzi G, Griesser M, Siston R, Agarwal S . The basic science of continuous passive motion in promoting knee health: a systematic review of studies in a rabbit model. Arthroscopy. 2013; 29(10):1722-31. PMC: 4955557. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2013.05.028. View

11.

Steadman J, Rodkey W, Briggs K . Microfracture to treat full-thickness chondral defects: surgical technique, rehabilitation, and outcomes. J Knee Surg. 2002; 15(3):170-6. View

12.

Gobbi A, Karnatzikos G, Kumar A . Long-term results after microfracture treatment for full-thickness knee chondral lesions in athletes. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013; 22(9):1986-96. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-013-2676-8. View

13.

MOSIER C . A critical examination of the concepts of face validity. Educ Psychol Meas. 2010; 7(2):191-205. DOI: 10.1177/001316444700700201. View

14.

Okike K, Kocher M, Mehlman C, Bhandari M . Conflict of interest in orthopaedic research. An association between findings and funding in scientific presentations. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89(3):608-13. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00994. View

15.

Kon E, Verdonk P, Condello V, Delcogliano M, Dhollander A, Filardo G . Matrix-assisted autologous chondrocyte transplantation for the repair of cartilage defects of the knee: systematic clinical data review and study quality analysis. Am J Sports Med. 2009; 37 Suppl 1:156S-66S. DOI: 10.1177/0363546509351649. View

16.

Krych A, Robertson C, Williams 3rd R . Return to athletic activity after osteochondral allograft transplantation in the knee. Am J Sports Med. 2012; 40(5):1053-9. DOI: 10.1177/0363546511435780. View

17.

Harris J, Siston R, Brophy R, Lattermann C, Carey J, Flanigan D . Failures, re-operations, and complications after autologous chondrocyte implantation--a systematic review. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2011; 19(7):779-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.joca.2011.02.010. View

18.

Kanneganti P, Harris J, Brophy R, Carey J, Lattermann C, Flanigan D . The effect of smoking on ligament and cartilage surgery in the knee: a systematic review. Am J Sports Med. 2012; 40(12):2872-8. PMC: 3978172. DOI: 10.1177/0363546512458223. View

19.

Jakobsen R, Engebretsen L, Slauterbeck J . An analysis of the quality of cartilage repair studies. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87(10):2232-9. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02904. View

20.

Gomoll A, Kang R, Chen A, Cole B . Triad of cartilage restoration for unicompartmental arthritis treatment in young patients: meniscus allograft transplantation, cartilage repair and osteotomy. J Knee Surg. 2009; 22(2):137-41. DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1247738. View