Table 1.
Study characteristics.
| Study | Population | Setting | Sample Size | Properties Evaluated | GRoC evaluated | Interval |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beattie et al. (2011) | Patients with work-related musculoskeletal disorders | Physical therapy clinic | 1944 | Validity (correlation) MR-12 vs GRoC |
GRoC 9 points 1 = very much better, 5 = no change and 9 = very much worse |
Completed once after the 4-week intervention |
| Costa et al. (2008) | Patients with acute lower back pain | Physiotherapy clinics | 99 | Reliability (reproducibility) Validity (construct and correlation for external responsiveness) GPE vs FRI, RMDQ, PSFS (Brazilian-Portuguese versions) |
GPE 11-points −5 (“vastly worse”) through 0 (“no change”) to +5 (completely recovered”) |
GPE was completed at time points of: baseline, 24 h and then 2 weeks |
| Freitas et al. (2019) | Patients with chronic lower back pain | Physiotherapy clinic | 84 | Reliability (test-retest) Validity (convergent) GPE vs PGIC Responsiveness (correlations) of GPE |
GPES 11- points −5 (“vastly worse”) through 0 (“no change”) to +5 (completely recovered”) |
GPES-PT was completed at baseline, after 48 h and six weeks after intervention. |
| Garrison et al. (2012) | Patients with shoulder impingement | Physical therapy clinics | 52 | Validity (correlation) GRoC vs ASES |
GRoC 15-point −7 (worse) to +7 (better) |
GRoC was completed each week for a time period of 8 weeks |
| Moore-Reed et al. (2017) | Patients with shoulder pain | Sports medical centre | 99 | Reliability (inter-rater/agreement) | GRoC 15-points −7 (‘‘a very great deal worse’’) to 0 (‘‘about the same’’) to +7 (‘‘a very great deal better’’) |
GRoC was measured at baseline and 24 h |
| Schmidt et al. (2005) | Patients with upper limb extremity musculoskeletal problems | Physical or occupational therapy outpatient clinics | 211 | Validity (correlation) GRoC vs DASH, SF-12 PCS, SPADI, PRWE |
Retrospective GRC 29-points −1 to −14 (deterioration), 0 for no change and +1 to +14 for improvement |
GRoC was completed at baseline and 3 months |
| Schmidt et al. (2015) | Patients with disorders in the hip, foot or ankle | Physical therapy outpatient clinics | 7341 | Validity (correlation) GRoC vs FS |
GRoC 15-point −7 (worse), 0 (no change) and +7 (better) |
GRoC was completed at 5 different time points over 180 days |
| Wang et al. (2018) | Patients with orthopaedic lumbar spine impairments | Outpatient Rehabilitation clinics | 52767 | Reliability (test-retest) Validity (correlation) GRoCt vs GRoCP GRoCp vs FSCH GRoCt vs FSCH |
GRoC 15-point −7 (worse), 0 (no change) and +7 (better) |
GRoC was completed at both intake and again at discharge |
GRoC = Global Rating of Change, GPE = Global Perceived Effect, PGIC = Patient Global Impression of Change, MR- 12 = Measuring Patient Satisfaction with Physical Therapy Care, FRI = Functional Rating Index, RMDQ = Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, PSFS = Patient Specific Functional Scale, ASES = American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon's Scale, SF- 12 = Short Form 12, SPADI = The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, PRWE = Patient Rated Wrist Evaluation, FS = Functional Status, GPES-PT = Portuguese version of GPE, Functional status change score (FSCH) was defined by subtracting the FS score at intake from the FS score at discharge (FSCH = discharge FS–intake FS), GRoCt = GRoC completed from the treated physician, GRoCP = GRoC completed by patient.