目的:评价臀腱病结局指标的性质。
方法:多阶段范围界定/系统评价。
方法:Cochrane,PubMed,Embase,Scopus,WebofScience,PEDro,CINAHL,对SPORTDISCUS进行了搜索(2021年12月),以确定用于评估臀腱病的措施。措施被映射到肌腱病的核心健康领域。Medline,CINAHL,搜索Embase和PubMed(2021年12月),以评估在最初搜索中捕获的臀腱病结局指标的测量特性。两篇综述都包括了对臀腱病患者的治疗进行评估的研究,由专业人士诊断。遵循基于共识的卫生仪器选择方法标准,包括偏见评估和结果综合。
结果:关于维多利亚运动评估研究所-臀肌肌腱病(VISA-G)的六项研究报告。一项研究报告了髋关节结果评分(HOS)-日常生活活动(ADL)和运动。VISA-G具有足够的结构效度(已知组)和反应性(干预前)的中等质量证据,具有足够可靠性的低质量证据,测量误差,可理解性和结构有效性不足(收敛性),以及足够全面的低质量证据,相关性和反应性(与其他结果指标的比较)。居屋(ADL)和居屋(运动)都有非常低质量的证据证明有足够的可靠性,结构效度和全面性的相关性和不足。居屋(ADL)的证据质量很低,具有足够的可理解性和测量误差不足。居屋(体育)的质量证据非常低,可理解性不一致,测量误差足够。
结论:目前尚缺乏经严格验证的臀腱病结局指标。VISA-G是捕获与臀腱病相关的残疾的首选选择。
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate properties of outcome measures for gluteal tendinopathy.
METHODS: Multistage scoping/systematic review.
METHODS: Cochrane, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PEDro, CINAHL, SPORTDISCUS were searched (December 2021) to identify measures used to evaluate gluteal tendinopathy. Measures were mapped to the core health domains for tendinopathy. Medline, CINAHL, Embase and PubMed were searched (December 2021) for studies evaluating measurement properties of gluteal tendinopathy outcome measures captured in the initial search. Both reviews included studies that evaluated a treatment in participants with gluteal tendinopathy, diagnosed by a professional. Consensus-based-Standards for the Selection of Health Instruments methodology were followed-including bias assessment and synthesis of findings.
RESULTS: Six studies reported on the Victorian Institute of Sport Assessment-Gluteal Tendinopathy (VISA-G). One study reported on the Hip Outcome Score (HOS)-activities of daily living (ADL) and Sport.The VISA-G had moderate-quality evidence of sufficient construct validity (known group) and responsiveness (pre-post intervention), low-quality evidence of sufficient reliability, measurement error, comprehensibility and insufficient construct validity (convergent), and very low-quality evidence of sufficient comprehensiveness, relevance and responsiveness (comparison with other outcome measures).Both the HOS(ADL) and HOS(Sport) had very low-quality evidence of sufficient reliability, relevance and insufficient construct validity and comprehensiveness. The HOS(ADL) had very low-quality evidence of sufficient comprehensibility and insufficient measurement error. The HOS(Sport) had very low quality evidence of inconsistent comprehensibility and sufficient measurement error.
CONCLUSIONS: Rigorously validated outcome measures for gluteal tendinopathy are lacking. The VISA-G is the preferred available option to capture the disability associated with gluteal tendinopathy.