Table 6.
Clinimetric properties of patient-reported foot function measures
| Instrument; author year | Reliability e.g., IRT, CTT ICC, kappa, test-retest | Cronbach’s alpha | Instrument /Domain N items/ Item generated sources | Validity (Face, content, criterion or construct) and other measures | Response to change | Completion time | Sample N diagnoses conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FFI; Budiman Mak, E
[7] 1991 |
CTT |
Total: 0.96 |
FFI |
Face: yes |
Yes |
10 minutes |
N=87 |
| ICC total: 0.87 |
Pain: 0.70 |
23 items |
Criterion: r=0.52 FFI total scores vs 50 ft walked |
Early rheumatoid arthritis |
|||
| ICC (pain): 0.70 |
Disability: 0.93 Activity |
Clinician and patient |
Construct: Yes |
Conclusion: Positive |
|||
| ICC (disability): 0.84 |
Limitation 0.73 |
|
|
|
|||
| ICC (activity limitation): 0.81 |
|
|
|
|
|||
| FFI pain subscale (R/L foot); Saag, KG
[23] 1996 |
CTT |
0.94-0.96 |
FFI side-to-side; Clinician and patient |
Face: Yes |
|
|
N=63 Rheumatoid foot pain |
| ICC: 0.79-0.89 |
|
|
Content: Yes |
|
|
Conclusion: Positive |
|
| FFI and AOS; Domsic, RT
[24]1998 |
CTT |
|
AOS |
Criterion: AOS vs WOMAC disability |
|
|
N=562 |
| ICC: 0.97 |
|
18 items; Clinician |
r=0.65 pain r=0.79 |
|
|
Dx: Ankle Osteoarthritis |
|
| Pain: 0.95 |
|
|
Construct: Yes |
|
|
Conclusion: Positive |
|
| Disability: 0.94 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FFI & FHSQ. Bennet, PJ
[9]1998 |
CTT |
0.85-0.88 |
FHSQ |
Criterion: Yes |
|
3-5 minutes |
N=255 Dx: Hallux valgus osteoarthritis |
| ICC |
Pain: 0.88 |
13 items |
Construct: Yes, discriminant validity; Goodness of Fit |
|
|
Conclusion: Positive |
|
| 0.74-0.92 |
Function: 0.85 |
Clinician and Patient |
|
|
|
|
|
| pain 0.86 |
Footwear: 0.85 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| function 0.92 |
Foothealth: 0.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| footwear 0.74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| foothealth 0.78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FFI (5 pt); Kuyvenhoven, MM
[3] 2002 |
CTT |
0.88-0.94 |
FFI (5 pt) |
Concurrent validity: Yes |
Yes |
|
N=206 |
| ICC 0.64-0.79 |
Total: 0.93 |
15 items |
|
|
|
Dx: Non-traumatic foot complaint |
|
| Total: 0.76 |
Pain: 0.88 |
Clinician |
|
|
|
Conclusion: Positive |
|
| Pain: 0.64 |
Disability: 0.92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Disability: 0.79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FFI & FIS; Helliwell,P
[29] 2005 |
IRT |
Not performed |
FIS |
Face: Yes |
|
|
N=192 |
| ICC |
|
51 items |
Content: Yes |
|
|
Rheumatoid arthritis |
|
| Impairment/shoes: 0.84 Activities/participation: 0/96 |
|
2 subscales |
Construct: Yes |
|
|
Conclusion: Positive |
|
| |
|
clinician and patient |
Goodness of Fit |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FFI; Agel, J
[25] 2005 |
ICC |
|
FFI |
|
|
|
N =54 FFI was tested in non-systemic or traumatic foot problems. |
| Total: 0.68 |
|
19 items items each from pain and difficulty subscales were deleted |
|
|
|
FFI was good for individuals with low level functioning. |
|
| All subscale values were significant at .01 level |
|
Clinician |
|
|
|
Conclusion: Positive |
|
| FFI-R; Budiman-Mak, E
[11] 2006 |
IRT |
Total: 0.95 |
FFI-R |
Criterion: Yes |
|
15 minutes |
N=92 |
| Person reliability: 0.96 |
Pain: 0.93 |
Long form (68 items); Short form (34 items) Clinician and patient |
Construct: Yes |
|
|
Dx: Chronic foot and ankle problems |
|
| Item reliability:0.93 |
Disability: 0.93 |
|
Minimal floor effect (4.5%) |
|
|
Conclusion: Positive |
|
| |
Activity limitation: 0.88 |
|
Goodness of Fit |
|
|
|
|
| |
Psychosocial: 0.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FFI & SF 36: SooHoo, NF
[27] 2006 |
Pearson Correlation of FFI to SF-36: Pain: -0.10 to −0.61; |
|
FFI |
Construct: Yes |
|
|
N=69 |
| Disability: -0.23 to −0.69 |
|
23 items |
|
|
|
Forefoot and hindfoot complaints |
|
| Activity limitation: -0.23 to −0.61 |
|
3 domains |
|
|
|
Moderate correlation between FFI and SF-36 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Conclusion: Positive |
|
| FFI AOFAS; Baumhaur, JF
[32] 2006 |
ICC AOFAS Summary Scores: Hallux 0.95 Lesser toes: 0.8 Pearson’s correlations mean value AOFAS Hallux vs. FFI: r=0.80, AOFAS lesser toes vs FFI: r=0.69; Pain subscale AOFAS Hallux vs. FFI summary score: r=0.31 |
|
FFI |
Content: Yes |
|
|
N=11 |
| |
|
23 items |
Criterion: Yes |
|
|
Rheumatoid Hallux and lesser toes |
|
| |
|
3 domains |
Ceiling effect noted in lesser toe activity subscale |
|
|
Conclusion: Positive |
|
| FFI FHSQ ; Landorf, KB
[101] 2007 |
ICC measures were reported; Minimal important difference (MID) was the focus of this clinical measure |
|
MID |
|
|
|
N=175 |
| |
|
FHSQ Pain 14, Function 7, General health 9 |
|
|
|
Plantar fasciitis |
|
| |
|
FFI Pain 12, Function 7, Total 7 |
|
|
|
Conclusion: Positive |
|
| |
|
VAS |
|
|
|
|
|
| Pain 9 | |||||||
| FFI, AOFAS; Ibrahim, T
[33] 2007 |
Test-retest AOFAS; pre and post operation was no different; 41% response rate. Pearson correlation with FFI was −0.68 for all the subjective components of AOFAS. Hallux module subjective component was −0.46 |
|
AOFAS subjective component; Items dependent on modules |
Criterion: yes |
Yes |
|
N=45 Foot and ankle problems |
| |
|
Clinician |
Construct: Yes |
|
|
AOFAS reliability and validity was tested. |
|
| |
|
|
Discriminant and predictive validity |
|
|
Conclusion: positive with caution due to several limitations as mentioned in the paper. |
|
| FFI, FFI Taiwan Chinese; Wu, SH
[36] 2008 |
ICC |
CA |
|
Criterion: Yes Floor effect 10% |
|
|
N=79 |
| Total 0.82 |
Total 0.94 |
|
|
|
|
Traumatic (fracture) non-traumatic plantar fasciitis foot problems |
|
| Pain 0.74 |
Pain 0.91 |
|
|
|
|
Conclusion: positive with caution, due to limitations (see article) |
|
| Disability 0.76 activity limitation 0.88 |
Disability 0.95 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Activity limitation 0.75 |
Clinician and patients |
|
|
|
|
|
| Pearson’s correlations | |||||||
| |
FFI total with SF 36 r=−0.59 plan- tar fasciitis r=−0.61 ankle fracture |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| FFI, FFI- German Naal FD
[34] 2008 |
ICC |
CA total 0.97 |
FFI German 18 items pain and disability subscales 3 items were added to the instrument by patients |
Construct yes Convergent validity FFI-G vs PCS of SF-36, VAS pain, disability UCLA activity scale |
Yes |
8.3 min |
N= 53 |
| Total 0.98 |
pain 0.90 |
Clinician and patients |
|
|
|
Various foot problems required surgery |
|
| Pain 0.97 |
disability 0.95 |
Patient related difficulty 2.4 of rating scale 1-10 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Disability 0.99 |
Cross cultural adaptation English to German with forward and backward protocol |
|
|
|
|
Conclusion: positive |
|
| FFI-R; Rao S
[75] 2009 |
This report is about minimal detectible change (MDC90) a measure of clinical importance. |
|
FFI-R long 68 items |
MDC Total 5 Pain 5 |
|
|
N=22 Orthoses treatment in mid foot pain |
| A result of orthoses intervention in midfoot arthritis |
|
|
Activity limitation 7 |
|
|
Conclusion positive |
|
| |
|
|
Effect Size (ES) Total 0.4 Pain 0.6 Activity limitation 0.4 |
|
|
MDC and ES findings are significant |
|
| FFI-R; Rao, S
[76] 2010 |
A measure of clinical importance of orthoses intervention |
|
FFI-R long 68 items |
MDC Total 5, Pain 5 Stiffness 6, Disanility 7, Activity limitation 7 Psychosocial 7 ES: Total 0.7, Pain 0.84, Stiffness 0.31, Disability 0.6, Limitation 0.57, Psycho social 0.32 |
|
|
N 30 Mid foot pain |
| Conclusion positive |