Table 4.
Measuring agreement between the PROMs
| EQ-5D-5L vs OHS | EQ-VAS vs OHS | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Preoperative | Krippendorff’s alpha | 0.704 (0.648, 0.752)—substantial | 0.382 (0.289, 0.465)—fair |
| ICC | 0.827 (0.787, 0.859)—good | 0.553 (0.450, 0.636)—moderate | |
| CCC | 0.704 (0.652, 0.756)—moderate | 0.381 (0.292, 0.469)—poor | |
| 6 weeks | Krippendorff’s alpha | 0.640 (0.575, 0.697)—substantial | 0.519 (0.439, 0.590)—moderate |
| ICC | 0.781 (0.731, 0.822)—good | 0.684 (0.611, 0.743)—moderate | |
| CCC | 0.640 (0.579, 0.701)—moderate | 0.519 (0.443, 0.594)—moderate | |
| 6 months | Krippendorff’s alpha | 0.658 (0.583, 0.719)—substantial | 0.462 (0.361, 0.550)—acceptable |
| ICC | 0.793 (0.737, 0.837)—good | 0.632 (0.532, 0.710)—moderate | |
| CCC | 0.656 (0.588, 0.725)—moderate | 0.461 (0.366, 0.555)—poor |
PROMs patient related outcome measures, OHS Oxford Hip Score, EQ5D-5L EQ-5D-5L utility index score, EQ-VAS Visual analogue score of the EQ-5D-5L, ICC intraclass correlation coefficient, CCC Lin’s concordance correlation coefficient