hh.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Comparison of the Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) and the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society Score (AOFAS)
Departments of Orthopedics and Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden.
Departments of Orthopedics and Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Skåne University Hospital Malmö, Sweden.
Departments of Rheumatology and Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-8081-579X
Department of Clinical Physiology, Kalmar Hospital, Kalmar and Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, University Hospital Linköping, Linköping, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2014 (English)In: Foot & ankle international, ISSN 1071-1007, E-ISSN 1944-7876, Vol. 35, no 10, 1031-1036 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: The Self-reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) is a patient-reported outcome measure, while the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society Score (AOFAS) is a clinician-based score, both used for evaluation of foot and ankle disorders. The purpose of this study was to compare the psychometric properties of these 2 scoring systems.

METHODS: A total of 95 patients with great toe disorders and 111 patients with ankle or hindfoot disorders completed the 2 scores before and after surgery. We evaluated time to complete the scores in seconds, correlations between scores with Spearman's correlation coefficient (rs), floor and ceiling effects by proportion of individuals who reached the minimum or maximum values, test-retest reliability and interobserver reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), internal consistency by Cronbach's coefficient alpha (CA), and responsiveness by effect size (ES). Data are provided as correlation coefficients, means, and standard deviations.

RESULTS: SEFAS was completed 3 times faster than AOFAS. The scores correlated with an rs of .49 for great toe disorders and .67 for ankle/hindfoot disorders (both P < .001). None of the scores had any floor or ceiling effect. SEFAS test-retest ICC values measured 1 week apart were .89 for great toe and .92 for ankle/hindfoot disorders, while the corresponding ICC values for AOFAS were .57 and .75. AOFAS interobserver reliability ICC values were .70 for great toe and .81 for ankle/hindfoot disorders. SEFAS CA values were .85 for great toe and .86 for ankle/hindfoot disorders, while the corresponding CA values for AOFAS were .15 and .42. SEFAS ES values were 1.15 for great toe and 1.39 for ankle/hindfoot disorders, while the corresponding ES values for AOFAS were 1.05 and 1.73.

CONCLUSION: As SEFAS showed similar or better outcome in our tests and was completed 3 times faster than AOFAS, we recommend SEFAS for evaluation of patients with foot and ankle disorders.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, prospective comparative study. © The Author(s) 2014.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2014. Vol. 35, no 10, 1031-1036 p.
National Category
Clinical Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hh:diva-26416DOI: 10.1177/1071100714543647ISI: 000345189500011PubMedID: 25015390Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-84910050556OAI: oai:DiVA.org:hh-26416DiVA: diva2:745444
Available from: 2014-09-10 Created: 2014-09-10 Last updated: 2017-03-16Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Bremander, Ann
In the same journal
Foot & ankle international
Clinical Medicine

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 60 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf