Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Objectives To ascertain the smallest amounts of change for the three Manchester-Oxford Foot Questionnaire (MOXFQ) domains that are likely to be clinically meaningful and beyond measurement error for conditions affecting the foot/ankle. Estimates were compared with those from the Short-Form 36 (SF-36). Study Design and Setting A prospective observational study of 671 consecutive patients undergoing foot or ankle surgery at an orthopedic hospital. Before and 9 months after surgery, patients completed the MOXFQ and SF-36; transition items (anchor) asked about perceived changes in foot/ankle pain or problems since the surgery. Results Four hundred ninety-one patients completed pre- and postoperative questionnaires. Anchor-based minimal clinically important change (MCIC) values were ∼13 points for each of the MOXFQ Walking/standing (W/S), Pain, and Social Interaction (S-I) domains [and greater than the standard error of measurement (SEM)]. MCIC values for all SF-36 domains fell within the SEM. Between-group MCIDs for the MOXFQ were W/S, 16.2; Pain, 9.9; S-I, 9.3. Distribution-based minimal detectable change (MDC90) values for the MOXFQ were ∼11, ∼12, and ∼16 score points for the W/S, Pain, and S-I scales, respectively. Conclusion This article provides information for aiding the interpretability of MOXFQ outcomes data and for planning future studies. The SF-36 is not recommended as a primary outcome for foot/ankle surgery. © 2014 Published by Elsevier.

Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.01.003

Type

Journal article

Journal

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Publication Date

01/01/2014

Volume

67

Pages

697 - 705