Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 56, Issue 1 , Pages 68-74 , January 2003

Rasch scoring of outcomes of total hip replacement

  • Ray Fitzpatrick

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel: +44 01865 226728; fax: +44 01865 226720.
    • Department of Public Health, Institute of Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, United Kingdom
    • ,
  • Josephine M Norquist

      Affiliations

    • Department of Public Health, Institute of Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Headington, Oxford, OX3 7LF, United Kingdom
    • ,
  • Jill Dawson

      Affiliations

    • OCHRAD, School of Healthcare, Oxford Brookes University, 44 London Rd., Oxford OX3 7PD, United Kingdom
    • ,
  • Crispin Jenkinson

      Affiliations

    • Department of Public Health, Health Services Research Unit, Institute of Health Scences, University of Oxford, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LF, United Kingdom
    • Picker Institute Europe, King's Mead House, Oxpens Rd., Oxford OX1 1RX, United Kingdom

Received 5 December 2001 ,Revised 17 May 2002 ,Accepted 2 September 2002.

References 

  1. Wright BD, Masters GN. Rating scale analysis. Chicago: MESA Press;; 1982;
  2. Wright BD, Linacre JM. Observations are always ordinal; measurements, however, must be interval. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989;70:857–860
  3. Granger CV, Deutsch A, Linn R. Rasch analysis of the functional independence measure (FIM) mastery test. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1998;79:52–57
  4. MacKnight C, Rockwood K. Rasch analysis of the hierarchical assessment of balance and mobility (HABAM). J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:1224–1242
  5. Guyatt GH, Kirshner B, Jaeschke R. Measuring health status (what are the necessary measurement properties?). J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:1341–1345
  6. Beaton D, Bombardier C, Katz JN, et al.  Looking for important change/differences in studies of responsiveness. J Rheumatol. 2001;28:400–405
  7. Husted J, Cook R, Farewell VT, et al.  Methods for assessing responsiveness (a critical review and recommendations). J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:459–468
  8. Hays RD, Morales L, Reise S. Item response theory and health outcomes measurement in the 21st century. Med Care. 2000;38:S28–S42
  9. Liang MH, Fossel AH, Larson MG. Comparisons of five health status instruments for orthopedic evaluation. Med Care. 1990;28:632–642
  10. Shields RK, Enloe LJ, Leo KC. Health related quality of life in patients with total hip or knee replacement. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80:572–579
  11. Fitzpatrick R, Shortall E, Sculpher M, et al.  Primary total hip replacement surgery (a systematic review of outcomes and modelling of cost-effectiveness associated with different prostheses). Health Technol Assess. 1998;2:1–64
  12. Robinson AH, Palmer CR, Villar RN. Is revision as good as primary hip replacement? A comparison of quality of life. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999;81:42–45
  13. Espehaug B, Havelin LI, Engesaeter LB, et al.  Patient satisfaction and function after primary and revision total hip replacement. Clin Orthop. 1998;351:135–148
  14. Bayley KB, London MR, Grunkmeier GL, et al.  Measuring the success of treatment in patient terms. Med Care. 1995;33(Suppl 4):AS226–AS235
  15. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, et al.  Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78:185–190
  16. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, et al.  Comparison of measures to assess outcomes in total hip replacement surgery. Qual Health Care. 1996;5:81–88
  17. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, et al.  The problem of ‘noise’ in monitoring patient-assessed outcomes (generic, disease-specific and site-specific instruments for total hip replacement). J Health Serv Res Policy. 1996;1:224–231
  18. Fitzpatrick R, Dawson J. Health-related quality of life and the assessment of outcomes of total hip replacement surgery. Psychology Health. 1997;12:793–803
  19. Dawson J, Jameson-Shortall E, Emerton M, et al.  Issues relating to long-term follow-up in hip arthroplasty surgery (a review of 598 cases at 7 year comparing prostheses using revision rates, survival analysis, and patient-based measures). J Arthroplasty. 2000;15:710–717
  20. Fitzpatrick R, Morris R, Hajat S, et al.  The value of short and simple measures to assess outcomes for patients of total hip replacement surgery. Qual Health Care. 2000;9:146–150
  21. McMurray R, Heaton J, Sloper P, et al.  Measurement of patient perceptions of pain and disability in relation to total hip replacement (the place of the oxford hip score in mixed methods). Qual Health Care. 1999;8:228–233
  22. Shepperd S, Harwood D, Jenkinson C, et al.  randomised controlled trial comparing hospital at home care with inpatient hospital care. I (Three month follow up of health outcomes). BMJ. 1998;316:1786–1791
  23. Wright BD, Stone MH. Best test design. Chicago: Mesa Press;; 1979;
  24. McHorney CA, Haley SM, Ware-JE . Evaluation of the MOS SF-36 Physical Functioning Scale (PF-10) (II. Comparison of relative precision using Likert and Rasch scoring methods). J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:451–461
  25. Raczek AE, Ware JE, Bjorner JB, et al.  Comparison of Rasch and summated rating scales constructed from SF-36 physical functioning items in seven countries (results from the IQOLA project). J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51:1203–1214
  26. Smith EV. Understanding Rasch measurement (metric development and score reporting in Rasch measurement). J Appl Meas. 2000;1:303–326
  27. Linacre JM, Wright BD. A user's guide to WINSTEPS (Rasch model computer program). Chicago: MESA Press;; 2000;
  28. Wright BD, Linacre JM, Gustafson J-E, et al.  Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Meas Trans. 1994;8:370
  29. Cella D, Chang CH. A discussion of item response theory and its applications in health status assessment. Med Care. 2000;38(Suppl 9):66–72
  30. Stucki G, Daltroy L, Katz JN, et al.  Interpretation of change scores in ordinal clinical scales and health status measures (the whole may not equal the sum of the parts). J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:711–717
  31. Birbeck GL, Kim S, Hays RD, et al.  Quality of life measures in epilepsy. how well can they detect change over time?. Neurology. 2000;54:1822–1827
  32. Wolfe F. Which HAQ is best? A comparison of the HAQ, MHAQ and RA-HAQ, a difficult 8 item HAQ (DHAQ), and a rescored 20 item HAQ (HAQ20) (analyses in 2,491 rheumatoid arthritis patients following leflunomide initiation). J Rheumatol. 2001;28:982–989
  33. Prieto L, Roset M, Badia X. Rasch measurement in the assessment of growth hormone deficiency in adult Patients. J Appl Meas. 2001;2:48–64
  34. Chang WC, Chan C. Rasch analysis for outcomes measures (some methodological considerations). Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1995;76:934–939
  35. Wolfe EW, Chiu CW. Measuring pretest-posttest change with a Rasch rating scale model. J Outcome Meas. 1999;3:134–161

PII: S0895-4356(02)00532-2

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 56, Issue 1 , Pages 68-74 , January 2003

Article Tools