The comprehensive osteoarthritis test: a simple index for measurement of treatment effects in clinical trials

Objective. To assess the measurement properties of a simple index of symptom severity in osteoarthritis (OA) of the hips and knees. Methods. Both the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the proposed new Comprehensive Osteoarthritis Test (COAT) instrument were completed weekly by 125 subjects in the context of a randomized, 12-week, 3 parallel-arm clinical trial. The reliabilities of the various scales were assessed on a weekly basis by use of Cronbach's alpha coefficients. The validity of the COAT total scale was assessed by correlation with the WOMAC total scale on a weekly basis with correlation coefficients, and in terms of the correlations between subject-level intercepts and slopes over time. The relative responsiveness of the WOMAC and COAT total scales was assessed using a multilevel (longitudinal) multivariate (WOMAC, COAT) linear model. Results. The WOMAC and COAT total scales were highly reliable (mean over weeks: WOMAC alpha = 0.98; COAT alpha = 0.97). The correlations between the WOMAC and COAT scales were very high (mean over weeks = 0.92; subject-level intercepts = 0.91, slopes = 0.88). The COAT total scale was significantly more responsive than the WOMAC total scale in the active treatment (34.8% improvement vs 26.8%; p = 0.002). Conclusion. The COAT total scale is simple to administer, reliable, valid, and responsive to treatment effects.

Outcome measurement in Australian rehabilitation environments

Objective: To determine the frequency and pattern of methods of outcome assessment used in Australian physical rehabilitation environments. Design: Postal survey. Methods: A questionnaire on service type, staffing, numbers of adults treated and outcome measures used for 7 conditions related to injury and road trauma as well as stroke and neuromuscular disorders was sent to 973 services providing adult physical rehabilitation treatment. Results: Questionnaires were completed by 440 service providers for a response rate of 45%, similar to that reported in a recent European survey reported in this journal. A small number of measures were reported as in use by most respondents, while a large number of measures were used by a few respondents. Measures of physical changes were used more frequently than those of generic well-being or quality of life. Ease of use and reporting to other professionals were cited as the most important reasons in selection of outcome measures. Conclusion: This Australian-wide survey detected considerable heterogeneity in outcome measurement procedures used in rehabilitation environments. While the goal of measurement may vary between providers and differ between conditions, the results highlight opportunities for harmonization, benchmarking and measurement of health-related quality of life.

Safety issues in functional capacity evaluation: Findings from a trial of a new approach for evaluating clients with chronic back pain

Although safety is recognized as a critical issue in functional capacity evaluations (FCEs), it has rarely been investigated. This paper reports on the findings of a study which examined safety aspects of a new approach to FCE. Fourteen rehabilitation clients with chronic back pain participated in the study. Aspects examined included the pre-FCE screening procedures, the monitoring of performance and safety during the FCE, and the end of FCE measures and follow-up procedures. Support was found for the screening procedures of the approach, particularly blood pressure measurement, and for the combined approach to monitoring of the persons performance from biomechanical, physiological and psychophysical perspectives. Issues for FCE safety in general are identified and discussed, including the importance of screening procedures to determine readiness for FCEs and the issue of load handling in FCEs, especially in relation to clients with chronic back pain.