Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
The information acquired from self-reported outcome instruments is useful only if there is evidence to support the interpretation of obtained scores. To properly interpret scores, there should be evidence for content validity, construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness. Evidence regarding score interpretation must also contain a description of the applicable test conditions, including information about the characteristics of subjects, timing of data collection, and construct of change. The objective of this review was to identify self-reported outcome instruments that have evidence to support their usefulness for assessingthe effect of treatment directed at individuals with foot and ankle-related pathologic conditions in an orthopaedic physical therapy setting. In addition, we provide specific information that will allow clinicians and researchers to select an appropriate instrument and properly interpret the obtained scores. Fourteen self-reported outcome instruments that met the objective of this review were identified. Five instruments, the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure, Foot Function index, Foot Health Status Questionnaire, Lower Extremity Function Scale, and Sports Ankle Rating System quality of life measure, satisfied all 4 categories of evidence (content validity, construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness) outlined herein.
Martin et al. (Thu,) studied this question.