2020
DOI: 10.1002/acr.24208
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measures of Foot Pain, Foot Function, and General Foot Health

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0
2

Year Published

2022
2022
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 220 publications
(421 reference statements)
0
12
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In the revised FFI (FFI-RL and FFI-RS) the scoring responses were converted into a four-point Likert scale, but the scoring method is, as far as we can see, not described specifically [ 13 ]. Other researchers have used the scoring method of the original FFI or only given a vague description of their scoring methods, and it is therefore difficult to interpret their results for comparison with our own [ 16 , 17 , 20 , 35 , 36 ]. We discussed the scoring of the FFI-RS with the developer and our own bio statistician who agreed that rescaling is one preferable option.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the revised FFI (FFI-RL and FFI-RS) the scoring responses were converted into a four-point Likert scale, but the scoring method is, as far as we can see, not described specifically [ 13 ]. Other researchers have used the scoring method of the original FFI or only given a vague description of their scoring methods, and it is therefore difficult to interpret their results for comparison with our own [ 16 , 17 , 20 , 35 , 36 ]. We discussed the scoring of the FFI-RS with the developer and our own bio statistician who agreed that rescaling is one preferable option.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The FFI-RS has similar psychometric properties to the FFI-RL for internal consistency [ 12 ] and good test-retest reliability [ 16 ]. The responsiveness of the FFI-RS has only been reported on each subscale [ 19 ], and we are unable to find studies that report on the SDC, MIC or responsiveness of the total score of the FFI-RS [ 20 ]. We consider the FFI-RS to be more user-friendly as it is less burdensome for patients.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For all subscales scores range from 0 to 100, with 0 indicating extreme problems and 100 indicating no problems. For the FOAS ceiling effects have been reported above 19% in all subscales thus ceiling effects will also be reported 18 . The FFI-5pt assesses the impact of foot pathology on function in terms of pain, activity restriction, and a mean total score 19 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the FOAS ceiling effects have been reported above 19% in all subscales thus ceiling effects will also be reported. 18 The FFI-5pt assesses the impact of foot pathology on function in terms of pain, activity restriction, and a mean total score. 19 The FFI-5pt is a validated patientadministered questionnaire which consists of 15 questions related to foot and ankle complaints.…”
Section: Patient Reported Foot and Ankle Complaintsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Moreover, assessment of footwear difficulties is limited to only 1 item enquiring about self-consciousness regarding the type of shoes worn, which may not reflect broader footwear issues faced by patients. 53 Additionally, the MOXFQ is not as responsive to change for conservative podiatric interventions such as foot orthoses, as seen in a study comparing the MOXFQ against the FHSQ. 54 Other PROMs Similar to MOXFQ, FAOS and FAAM are region-specific PROMs used in podiatric surgical studies.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%