Age- and Sex-Related Normative Data for the Foot Function Index in a German-Speaking Cohort

Schneider, W.; Jurenitsch, Stefan

doi:10.1177/1071100716659747

Cited by 11 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several foot- and ankle-specific scores are available, such as the Foot and Ankle Outcome Scale (FAOS), 32 the Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ), 10 the Foot Function Index (FFI), 33 the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS), 34 and the Low Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS). 12 However, to our knowledge, no population-based normative values are published for any of these.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Normative values are missing for FAOS and MOXFQ, whereas FFI, AOFAS, and LEFS have normative values published, but based on examinations of volunteers such as hospital employees. 12,33,34 That is, our study provides the first population-based normative foot- and ankle-specific PROM values, reflecting the general population, with data collected in a similar way as for the generic scores SF-36 and EQ-5D. 16,17,19,24,25,36 By this approach, we found that SEFAS normative values correlated inversely with age, similar to what has been found for the PROMs FFI, AOFAS, and LEFS, 12,33,34 and that men have higher SEFAS values than women, similar to the scores SF-36, 19 AOFAS, 34 FFI, 33 and LEF.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Age- and Gender-Specific Normative Values for the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS)

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age- and Gender-Specific Normative Values for the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS)

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For future studies, it is recommended that the responsiveness of this questionnaire should be evaluated, in order to determine whether this instrument is capable of detecting clinical changes in patients after a period of time and also, to identify the normative values of the FFI questionnaire in the Brazilian population. These values will contribute to the correct interpretation of the FFI scores according to the age, gender, and anthropometrics data, to allow the understanding of the clinical improvement after treatment in each evaluated group (Schneider and Jurenitsch 2016 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validity and reliability of the Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaire Brazilian-Portuguese version

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTo evaluate the validity and reliability of the Foot Function Index (FFI) in its Brazilian Portuguese version.MethodsThe validity and reliability of the FFI were tested in 50 volunteers, with plantar fasciitis, metatarsalgia and chronic ankle sprain. The FFI validity process used the Short Form-36 (SF-36) and Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) questionnaires. The correlation between FFI, SF-36 and FAOS was done using the Pearson’s linear coefficient. The inter and intra-evaluator reliability was ascertained by means of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the internal consistency by means of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. The scores were used to assess the standard error measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC) and ceiling floor and effects.ResultsThe validity process showed that there were correlations between FFI and the “pain” and “social aspects” subscales of SF-36 and all subscales of FAOS, except for “other symptoms”. The Brazilian-Portuguese version of FFI showed excellent intra and interevaluator correlations, with an ICC range of 0.99–0.97 and score reliability that was considered highly satisfactory, with Cronbach’s alpha range of 0.80–0.61. The SEMs for inter and intra-evaluator reliability were 1.32 and 1.08, respectively. The MDC was 2.42 (90 % confidence interval). No ceiling and floor effect were detected.ConclusionsThe Brazilian-Portuguese version of the FFI questionnaire was found to be a valid and reliable instrument for foot function evaluation, and can be used both in scientific settings and in clinical practice.

show abstract

“…Normative data for PROMs can aid in this problem by acting as reference data for a healthy population. Normative data are available for a few PROMs (Aasheim and Finsen 2014, Schneider and Jurenitsch 2016). For the LEFS, however, no such data are available.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Normative data for the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS)

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ackground and purposeThe lower extremity functional scale (LEFS) is a well-known and validated instrument for measurement of lower extremity function. The LEFS was developed in a group of patients with various musculoskeletal disorders, and no reference data for the healthy population are available. Here we provide normative data for the LEFS.MethodsHealthy visitors and staff at 4 hospitals were requested to participate. A minimum of 250 volunteers had to be included at each hospital. Participants were excluded if they had undergone lower extremity surgery within 1 year of filling out the questionnaire, or were scheduled for lower extremity surgery. Normative values for the LEFS for the population as a whole were calculated. Furthermore, the influence of sex, age, type of employment, socioeconomic status, and history of lower extremity surgery on the LEFS were investigated.Results1,014 individuals fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The median score for the LEFS for the whole population was 77 (out of a maximum of 80). Men and women had similar median scores (78 and 76, respectively), and younger individuals had better scores. Participants who were unfit for work had worse scores. There were no statistically significant correlations between socioeconomic status and type of employment on the one hand and LEFS score on the other. A history of lower extremity surgery was associated with a lower LEFS score.InterpretationHigh scores were observed for the LEFS throughout the whole population, although they did decrease with age. Men had a slightly higher score than women. There was no statistically significant correlation between socioeconomic status and LEFS score, but people who were unfit for work had a significantly worse LEFS score.

show abstract

Age- and Sex-Related Normative Data for the Foot Function Index in a German-Speaking Cohort

Abstract: II, prospective comparative study.

Cited by 11 publications

References 29 publications

Age- and Gender-Specific Normative Values for the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS)

Age- and Gender-Specific Normative Values for the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS)

Validity and reliability of the Foot Function Index (FFI) questionnaire Brazilian-Portuguese version

Normative data for the lower extremity functional scale (LEFS)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About