Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature is making SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19 research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Table 2 Summarised characteristics of the 15 identified outcome instruments. LET lateral elbow tendinopathy, VAS visual analogue scale

From: Assessing Patient-Centred Outcomes in Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: A Systematic Review and Standardised Comparison of English Language Clinical Rating Systems

Instrument Author (year) Development purpose Assessor Dimensions (no. items) Scales No. documents on development and metric properties (see Additional file 2) No. documents reporting instrument use internationally (English speaking) (see Additional file 2) Data from an exclusively LET population or mixed pathology
A&C (Andrews and Carson) Andrews et al. [45] To evaluate subjective and objective results of elbow arthroscopy Clinician Symptoms (3)
Activities (1)
Function (3)
4-point Likert scale scored out of 200 then interpreted as one of four groups (poor–excellent) 1 2 (2) Mixed
ASES-E (American Shoulder and Elbow Score-E) King et al. [46] Elbow functional assessment Patient and clinician Pain (5)
Function (12)
Satisfaction (1)
+ Clinical assessment
Mixture of visual analogue scale and 4-point Likert scales. 3 5 (5) Mixed
DASH
(Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand)
Hudak et al. [47] Region (arm) specific measure of disability and symptoms with any or multiple musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb. Patient Physical function (21)
Symptoms (5)
Psychosocial (4)
(optional work and sport/music module)
5-point Likert scale
Raw score converted to 0–100 scale
18 60 (23) Mixed
HSS (Hospital for Special Surgery) Inglis and Pellicci [48] Pre and post of assessment of elbow arthroplasty Clinician Pain (2)
Function (2)
+ Clinical assessment
Categorical scoring of pain at rest (5 options) and in bending (4). Function split into A (4) and B (5)
+ clinical assessment
Scored 0–100
3 1 (1) Mixed
LES (Liverpool Elbow Score) Sathyamoorthy et al. [49] Elbow specific measure of function and clinical state Patient and clinician Physical function (8)
Pain (1)
+ Clinical assessment
5-point Likert scale
Raw score converted to 0–10 scale
1 1 (0) Mixed
MEPS (Mayo Elbow Performance Score) Morrey and Adams [50] For the assessment of total elbow arthroplasty Clinician Pain (5)
Function (15)
+ Clinical assessment
10-point Likert scale
Scored out of 100 then interpreted as one of four groups (poor–excellent)
6 24 (9) Mixed
Morrey Broberg and Morrey [51] For the assessment of radial head fractures excision Clinician Pain (1)
+ Clinical assessment
Categorical scoring of pain (4 options)
Scored out of 100 then interpreted as one of four groups (poor–excellent)
2 4 (0) Mixed
Nirschl Nirschl [52] Assessment of LET based on phases of pain. Patient and clinician Pain (1)
+ Addition of VAS and surgical findings
Categorical scoring of pain (7 options) 2 16 (7) LET
OES (Oxford Elbow Score) Dawson et al. [53] For the assessment of the outcome of elbow surgery Patient Pain (4)
Function (4)
Limitation to work and leisure activities (2)
Psychosocial (2)
Categorical scoring options
Converted to numerical value (0–4)
Domains scored individually
5 5 (2) Mixed
PRTEE (Patient-Rated Tennis Elbow Evaluation) (formally PRFE) Overend et al. [54] For measurement of forearm pain and disability in patients with LET Patient Pain (5)
Function
• Specific (6)
• Usual (4)
10-point Likert scale
Raw score converted to 0–100 scale
9 53 (21) LET
qDASH (quick Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand) Beaton et al. [55] Abbreviated DASH score Patient Physical function (6)
Pain (2)
Psychosocial (3)
5 point Likert scale
Raw score converted to 0–100 scale
8 18 (5) Mixed
R&M (Roles and Maudsley) Roles and Maudsley [56] To classify the outcome of surgery in radial tunnel syndrome Clinician Pain
Movement
Activity
Placed in 1 of 4 groups (poor–excellent) dependent on composite of dimension finding 2 16 (2) Mixed
TEFS (Tennis Elbow Functional Score) Lowe [39] For the assessment of disability in patients with LET Patient Pain (10) 5-point Likert scale
Scores of 10 items added together
1 3 (0) LET
ULFI (Upper Limb Functional Index) Pransky et al. [57] For the assessment of upper limb function Patient Function (8) 10-point Likert scale
Scores of 8 items added together
1 6 (3) Mixed
Verhaar Verhaar et al. [58] For the assessment of the outcome of surgery in LET Clinician Pain
Satisfaction
Movement
Strength
Placed in 1 of 4 groups (poor–excellent) dependent on composite of dimension finding 1 6 (1) LET