Physical recovery in Arthroscopic knee surgery: unique contributions of coping behaviors to clinical outcomes and stress reactivity

Rosenberger, Patricia H.; Ickovics, Jeannette R.; Epel, Elissa S.; D'Entremont, D.; Jokl, Peter

doi:10.1080/0887044042000193460

Cited by 28 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A summary score ranging from 0 to 100 points is generated, with a higher score reflecting better knee function. The Tegner-Lysholm rating scale is the most widely used patient-reported outcome instrument in orthopaedic research [6,8,15,17,22] and is acceptable, reliable, and valid [10]. Knee function was assessed preoperatively to provide a baseline knee function score.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex Differences in Factors Influencing Recovery from Arthroscopic Knee Surgery

Rosenberger

Dhabhar

Epel

et al. 2010

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Many factors affect recovery from arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, including patient sex. However, sex differences in time to maximal recovery of knee function and factors influencing differential rates of recovery are unknown. Questions/purposes We determined (1) preoperative sex differences, (2) sex differences in rate and extent of recovery through 1 year postoperatively, and (3) clinical and fitness variables that could explain potential sex differences in recovery from partial meniscectomy. Patients and MethodsThe study sample consisted of 180 patients undergoing arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. Sex, age, body mass index, history of prior injury, length of time between knee injury/impairment and surgical evaluation, weekly exercise frequency, and self-reported fitness were assessed preoperatively, and extent of osteoarthritis was recorded postoperatively. We used the Tegner-Lysholm scale to assess knee function preoperatively and postoperatively at Weeks 1, 3, 8, 16, 24, and 48 followups.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex Differences in Factors Influencing Recovery from Arthroscopic Knee Surgery

Rosenberger

Dhabhar

Epel

et al. 2010

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared to the studies that had conducted their own exploratory factor analyses, those that based their factor structure on previous research tended to have smaller samples sizes. Of the 34 studies listed in Table 3, 14 studies had a sample size of less than 100 [77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85][86][87][88][89][90]. Some of the studies had more than 300 participants [91][92][93], where a factor analysis would have been supported by a sufficiently large sample size.…”

Section: Studies That Did Not Conduct Their Own Exploratory Factor Anmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Studies Using the Brief COPE: Religious Coping in Factor Analyses

Krägeloh

2011

Religions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Religion is generally recognized as a major resource for dealing with stressful events, but its relationship with secular coping strategies continues to be debated. The present article provides a systematic review of the way in which analyses of the sub-scale turning to religion of the widely used Brief COPE [1] instrument are presented in peer-reviewed research articles, in order to investigate how the wealth of data published using this instrument can inform how religious coping relates to other coping strategies. Of the 212 identified articles that included turning to religion in their analyses, 80 combined sub-scale scores to form higher-order coping factors, 38 of which based on exploratory factor analyses of their own datasets. When factor analyses had used individual items as indicators, religious coping was more likely to load together with maladaptive coping strategies, and more likely with adaptive coping strategies when analyses were conducted at sub-scale level. To a large extent, the variation in the results from exploratory factor analyses appears to be due to the diverse and often inappropriate factor analytic techniques used to determine the factor structure of the Brief COPE instrument. Reports from factor analyses of the Brief COPE therefore have very little value when trying to make general conclusions about the role of religious coping in relation to secular coping methods.

show abstract

“…It is the most widely used patient-reported knee function outcome instrument in orthopaedic research [29][30][31][32] and has demonstrated reliability and validity 33 . Items are differentially weighted on the basis of clinical criteria, and a summary score ranging from 0 to 100 points is obtained, with a higher score reflecting better knee functioning.…”

Section: Primary Outcome Measurementioning

confidence: 99%