Skip to main content
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases logoLink to Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases
. 2005 Jan;64(1):75–79. doi: 10.1136/ard.2003.019539

Using patients' and rheumatologists' opinions to specify a short form of the WOMAC function subscale

F Tubach 1, G Baron 1, B Falissard 1, I Logeart 1, M Dougados 1, N Bellamy 1, P Ravaud 1
PMCID: PMC1755192  PMID: 15608303

Abstract

Background: The WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) function subscale is widely used in clinical trials of hip and knee osteoarthritis. Reducing the number of items of the subscale would enhance efficiency and compliance, particularly for use in clinical practice applications.

Objective: To develop a short form of the WOMAC function subscale based on patients' and experts' opinions (WOMAC function short form).

Methods: WOMAC function subscale data (Likert version) were obtained from 1218 outpatients with painful hip or knee osteoarthritis. These patients and their rheumatologists selected the five items that they considered most in need of improvement. The rheumatologists were asked to select the five items for which patients in general are the most impaired. Items that were least important to patients and experts, those with a high proportion of missing data, and those with a response distribution showing a floor or ceiling response were excluded, along with one of a pair of items with a correlation coefficient >0.75.

Results: The WOMAC function short form included items 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 15 of the long form. The short form did not differ substantially from the long form in responsiveness (standardised response mean of 0.84 v 0.80).

Conclusions: A short form of the WOMAC function subscale was developed according to the views of patients and rheumatologists, based on the responses of 1218 patients and 399 rheumatologists. The clinical relevance and applicability of this WOMAC function subscale short form require further evaluation.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (67.1 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Altman R., Alarcón G., Appelrouth D., Bloch D., Borenstein D., Brandt K., Brown C., Cooke T. D., Daniel W., Feldman D. The American College of Rheumatology criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis of the hip. Arthritis Rheum. 1991 May;34(5):505–514. doi: 10.1002/art.1780340502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Altman R., Asch E., Bloch D., Bole G., Borenstein D., Brandt K., Christy W., Cooke T. D., Greenwald R., Hochberg M. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum. 1986 Aug;29(8):1039–1049. doi: 10.1002/art.1780290816. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bellamy N., Buchanan W. W., Goldsmith C. H., Campbell J., Stitt L. W. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988 Dec;15(12):1833–1840. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Coste J., Fermanian J., Venot A. Methodological and statistical problems in the construction of composite measurement scales: a survey of six medical and epidemiological journals. Stat Med. 1995 Feb 28;14(4):331–345. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780140402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Coste J., Guillemin F., Pouchot J., Fermanian J. Methodological approaches to shortening composite measurement scales. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997 Mar;50(3):247–252. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(96)00363-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Felson D. T., Zhang Y. An update on the epidemiology of knee and hip osteoarthritis with a view to prevention. Arthritis Rheum. 1998 Aug;41(8):1343–1355. doi: 10.1002/1529-0131(199808)41:8<1343::AID-ART3>3.0.CO;2-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Guillemin F., Coste J., Pouchot J., Ghézail M., Bregeon C., Sany J. The AIMS2-SF: a short form of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2. French Quality of Life in Rheumatology Group. Arthritis Rheum. 1997 Jul;40(7):1267–1274. doi: 10.1002/1529-0131(199707)40:7<1267::AID-ART11>3.0.CO;2-L. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. McConnell S., Kolopack P., Davis A. M. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC): a review of its utility and measurement properties. Arthritis Rheum. 2001 Oct;45(5):453–461. doi: 10.1002/1529-0131(200110)45:5<453::aid-art365>3.0.co;2-w. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Moran L. A., Guyatt G. H., Norman G. R. Establishing the minimal number of items for a responsive, valid, health-related quality of life instrument. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001 Jun;54(6):571–579. doi: 10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00342-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Whitehouse S. L., Lingard E. A., Katz J. N., Learmonth I. D. Development and testing of a reduced WOMAC function scale. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003 Jul;85(5):706–711. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES