Development and psychometric properties of knee-specific body-perception questionnaire in people with knee osteoarthritis: The Fremantle Knee Awareness Questionnaire

Abstract

BackgroundRecent systematic reviews have demonstrated that pain associated with knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a complex phenomenon that involves various contributors. People with knee OA exhibit symptoms of impaired body-perception, including reduced tactile acuity, impairments in limb laterality recognition, and degraded proprioceptive acuity. The Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire (FreBAQ) was developed to assess body-perception specific to the back in people with chronic low back pain. The aim of this study was to develop and assess the psychometric properties of a knee-specific version of the FreBAQ-J (FreKAQ-J), determine whether people with knee pain experience perceptual impairments and investigate the relationship between disturbed self-perception and clinical status.MethodsSixty-five people with knee OA completed the FreKAQ-J. A subset of the participants completed the FreKAQ-J again two-weeks later. Rasch analysis was used to assess item order, targeting, category ordering, unidimensionality, person fit, internal consistency, and differential item functioning. Validity was investigated by examining the relationship between the FreKAQ-J and clinical valuables.ResultsThe FreKAQ-J had acceptable internal consistency, unidimensionality, good test-retest reliability, and was functional on the category rating scale. The FreKAQ-J was significantly correlated with pain in motion, disability, pain-related catastrophizing, fear of movement, and anxiety symptomatology.ConclusionsWe developed FreKAQ-J by modifying the FreBAQ-J. The FreKAQ-J fits the Rasch measurement model well and is suitable for use in people with knee OA. Altered body perception may be worth evaluating when managing people with knee OA.

Explicit and Implicit Own's Body and Space Perception in Painful Musculoskeletal Disorders and Rheumatic Diseases: A Systematic Scoping Review

“…A graphical distribution of included studies grouped by clinical conditions examined is shown in Figure 3. Twenty-five studies (Grod and Diakow, 2002;Moseley, 2008;Wand et al, 2010Wand et al, , 2013bWand et al, , 2014Wand et al, , 2016Docherty et al, 2012;Lauche et al, 2012a;Valenzuela-Moguillansky, 2013;Hirakawa et al, 2014;Gilpin et al, 2015;Mibu et al, 2015;Nishigami et al, 2015Nishigami et al, , 2017Nishigami et al, , 2018Treleaven and Takasaki, 2015;Beales et al, 2016;Janssens et al, 2017;Moreira et al, 2017;Adamczyk et al, 2018a,b;Ehrenbrusthoff et al, 2018;Magni et al, 2018;Martínez et al, 2018) studies concerned the assessment of SoP dysfunctions, while twelve interventional studies (Barker et al, 2008;Preston and Newport, 2011;Wand et al, 2011Wand et al, , 2013aMorone et al, 2012;Paolucci et al, 2012;Diers et al, 2013;Vetrano et al, 2013;Ryan et al, 2014;Louw et al, 2017;Stanton et al, 2018;Nishigami et al, 2019) investigated the effects of perception-based intervention to reduce pain or to correct perceptual distortions. One study, (Lauche et al, 2012a) was included both in assessment and in intervention studies: it is a qualitative study i...…”

“…The distribution of research designs adopted for assessment studies is graphically represented in Figure 5. A conspicuous number of these studies is composed by those validating the Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire (FreBAQ) (Wand et al, 2014) and the Fremantle Knee Awareness Questionnaire (FreKAQ) (Nishigami et al, 2017), including validation studies into other languages (Janssens et al, 2017;Ehrenbrusthoff et al, 2018;Nishigami et al, 2018), and cross-sectional or case-control investigations across different clinical samples (Wand et al, 2013aBeales et al, 2016). Figure 6 shows the research designs adopted in the intervention studies included, of which a large part were pre-clinical experimental studies (Diers et al, 2013;Nishigami et al, 2019).…”

“…For neck pain, was considered 3.5 to 5 U on the 50-U Neck Pain Disability Index or 7 to 10% change (Pool et al, 2007;Stratford et al, 2009) for function and 2.5 on an 10-U NRS (25% change) for pain (Pool et al, 2007). 2015; Treleaven and Takasaki, 2015;Martínez et al, 2018), while the remaining 19 studies were clinical investigations (Moseley, 2008;Wand et al, 2010Wand et al, , 2013aWand et al, ,b, 2014Wand et al, , 2016Lauche et al, 2012a;Valenzuela-Moguillansky, 2013;Hirakawa et al, 2014;Mibu et al, 2015;Nishigami et al, 2015Nishigami et al, , 2017Nishigami et al, , 2018Beales et al, 2016;Janssens et al, 2017;Adamczyk et al, 2018a,b;Ehrenbrusthoff et al, 2018;Magni et al, 2018).…”

“…The majority of selected assessment studies evaluated the explicit SoP: five studies adopted the Body Image Drawing (BID) task (Moseley, 2008;Lauche et al, 2012a;Mibu et al, 2015;Nishigami et al, 2015;Moreira et al, 2017), eight studies used the FreBAQ (Wand et al, 2014Wand et al, 2013a;Beales et al, 2016;Janssens et al, 2017;Nishigami et al, 2017Nishigami et al, , 2018Ehrenbrusthoff et al, 2018) or the FreKAQ (Nishigami et al, 2017), two studies used the Neglect-Like Symptoms Questionnaire (NLSQ) (Hirakawa et al, 2014;Magni et al, 2018), one study investigate the visual size estimation in an experimental setting (Gilpin et al, 2015), one study investigated the rubber hand illusion (RHI) (Martínez et al, 2018), and one was a qualitative study on subjectively referred body perception (Valenzuela-Moguillansky, 2013).…”

Peer Review #1 of "Illusory resizing of the painful knee is analgesic in symptomatic knee osteoarthritis (v0.1)"

“…Oxford knee scores range from 0-48 where higher values indicate less 3 disability. Knee awareness/perception was evaluated using a modified version of the Fremantle 4 Knee Awareness Questionnaire (FreKAQ); scores range from 0-36 with higher scores reflecting 5 less knee awareness (Nishigami et al 2017). Perceived knee size was evaluated using established…”