The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form

Background The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form may be used to measure symptoms, function, and sports activity for people with a variety of knee disorders, including ligamentous and meniscal injuries, osteoarthritis, and patellofemoral dysfunction. To date, normative data have not been established for this valid, reliable, and responsive outcomes instrument. Purpose To provide clinicians and researchers with normative data to facilitate the interpretation of results on the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form. Study Design Cross-sectional survey. Methods The Subjective Knee Evaluation Form was mailed to 600 people in each of 8 age/gender categories (18-24 years, 25-34 years, 35-50 years, and 51-65 years for both male subjects and female subjects). Participants were drawn from a panel of 550 000 households (1 300 000 subjects) representative of noninstitutionalized persons in the United States and were matched to data from the United States Census Bureau on geographical region, market size, income, and household size. Results Complete data were available for 5246 knees. Twenty-eight percent of respondents reported an injury, weakness, or other problem with one or both knees. Normative data were determined for respondents as a whole and for the subset of respondents with no history of knee problems. Mean scores were determined for men aged 18 to 24 years (89 ± 18), 25 to 34 years (89 ± 16), 35 to 50 years (85 ± 19), and 51 to 55 years (77 ± 23); mean scores were also determined for women aged 18 to 24 years (86 ± 19), 25 to 34 years (86 ± 19), 35 to 50 years (80 ± 23), and 51 to 65 years (71 ± 26). Scores were higher for the subset of respondents with no history of current or prior knee problems. Conclusion Scores on the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Evaluation Form vary by age, gender, and history of knee problems. The normative data collected in this article will allow clinicians to interpret how patients with knee injuries are functioning relative to their age-and gender-matched peers and will enable researchers to determine the clinical outcomes of treatment.

[1]  D. H. O'donoghue An analysis of end results of surgical treatment of major injuries to the ligaments of the knee. , 1955, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[2]  D. Slocum,et al.  Pes anserinus transplantation. A surgical procedure for control of rotatory instability of the knee. , 1968, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[3]  R. Larson Rating sheet for knee function , 1972 .

[4]  J. Hughston,et al.  The role of the posterior oblique ligament in repairs of acute medial (collateral) ligament tears of the knee. , 1973, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[5]  J. Omohundro,et al.  The non-operative treatment of collateral ligament injuries of the knee in professional football players. An analysis of seventy-four injuries treated non-operatively and twenty-four injuries treated surgically. , 1974, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[6]  I. Smillie Diseases of the knee joint , 1974 .

[7]  Ft. W. Godshall THE CLASSIFICATION, TREATMENT AND FOLLOW-UP EVALUATION OF MEDIAL COLLATERAL LIGAMENT INJURIES OF THE KNEE: 2: p.m , 1975 .

[8]  J. L. Marshall,et al.  Knee Ligament Injuries: A Standardized Evaluation Method , 1977, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[9]  D. Dillman Mail and telephone surveys : the total design method , 1979 .

[10]  J. Lysholm,et al.  Evaluation of knee ligament surgery results with special emphasis on use of a scoring scale , 1982, The American journal of sports medicine.

[11]  F. Noyes,et al.  The symptomatic anterior cruciate-deficient knee. Part II: the results of rehabilitation, activity modification, and counseling on functional disability. , 1983, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[12]  J. Feagin,et al.  Postoperative evaluation and result recording in the anterior cruciate ligament reconstructed knee. , 1983, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[13]  J. Lysholm,et al.  Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries. , 1985, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[14]  K. Dehaven,et al.  An anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) evaluation format for assessment of artificial or autologous anterior cruciate reconstruction results. , 1987, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[15]  W. Clancy,et al.  Acute tears of the anterior cruciate ligament. Surgical versus conservative treatment. , 1988, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[16]  W. Müller,et al.  OAK knee evaluation. A new way to assess knee ligament injuries. , 1988, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[17]  F. Noyes,et al.  Bone-patellar ligament-bone and fascia lata allografts for reconstruction of the anterior cruciate ligament. , 1990, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[18]  B. Seedhom,et al.  A comparison of the Lysholm and Cincinnati knee scoring questionnaires , 1991, The American journal of sports medicine.

[19]  Richard A. Parker,et al.  Designing and Conducting Survey Research: A Comprehensive Guide , 1992 .

[20]  M. Friedman,et al.  Critical Analysis of Knee Ligament Rating Systems , 1995, The American journal of sports medicine.

[21]  B. Beynnon,et al.  Sensitivity to changes over time for the IKDC form, the Lysholm score, and the Cincinnati knee score A prospective study of 120 ACL reconstructed patients with a 2-year follow-up , 1999, Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy.

[22]  Edward C. Jones,et al.  Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of Four Knee Outcome Scales for Athletic Patients , 2001, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[23]  J. Richmond,et al.  Development and Validation of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form * , 2001, The American journal of sports medicine.

[24]  D. Zurakowski,et al.  Determinants of Patient Satisfaction with Outcome After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction , 2002, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[25]  A. Anderson,et al.  Development and validation of health-related quality of life measures for the knee. , 2002, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.