Objective. There are no Dutch language disease-specific questionnaires for patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome available that could help Dutch physiotherapists to assess and monitor these symptoms and functional limitations. The aim of this study was to translate the original disease-specific Kujala Patellofemoral Score into Dutch and evaluate its reliability. Methods. The questionnaire was translated from English into Dutch in accordance with internationally recommended guidelines. Reliability was determined in 50 stable subjects with an interval of 1 week. The patient inclusion criteria were age between 14 and 60 years; knowledge of the Dutch language; and the presence of at least three of the following symptoms: pain while taking the stairs, pain when squatting, pain when running, pain when cycling, pain when sitting with knees flexed for a prolonged period, grinding of the patella and a positive clinical patella test. The internal consistency, test–retest reliability, measurement error and limits of agreement were calculated. Results. Internal consistency was 0.78 for the first assessment and 0.80 for the second assessment. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICCagreement) between the first and second assessments was 0.98. The mean difference between the first and second measurements was 0.64, and standard deviation was 5.51. The standard error measurement was 3.9, and the smallest detectable change was 11. The Bland and Altman plot shows that the limits of agreement are 10.37 and 11.65. Conclusions. The results of the present study indicated that the test–retest reliability translated Dutch version of the Kujala Patellofemoral Score questionnaire is equivalent of the test– retest original English language version and has good internal consistency. Trial registration NTR (TC = 3258). Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Due to the ageing population, the prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders will continue to rise, as well as healthcare expenditure. To overcome these increasing expenditures, integration of orthopaedic care should be stimulated. The Primary Care Plus (PC+) intervention aimed to achieve this by facilitating collaboration between primary care and the hospital, in which specialised medical care is shifted to a primary care setting. The present study aims to evaluate the referral decision following orthopaedic care in PC+ and in particular to evaluate the influence of diagnostic tests on this decision. Therefore, retrospective monitoring data of patients visiting PC+ for orthopaedic care was used. Data was divided into two periods; P1 and P2. During P2, specialists in PC+ were able to request additional diagnostic tests (such as ultrasounds and MRIs). A total of 2,438 patients visiting PC+ for orthopaedic care were included in the analysis. The primary outcome was the referral decision following PC+ (back to the general practitioner (GP) or referral to outpatient hospital care). Independent variables were consultation- and patient-related predictors. To describe variations in the referral decision, logistic regression modelling was used. Results show that during P2, significantly more patients were referred back to their GP. Moreover, the multivariable analysis show a significant effect of patient age on the referral decision (OR 0.86, 95% CI = 0.81– 0.91) and a significant interaction was found between the treating specialist and the period (p = 0.015) and between patient’s diagnosis and the period (p < 0.001). Despite the significant impact of the possibility of requesting additional diagnostic tests in PC+, it is important to discuss the extent to which the availability of diagnostic tests fits within the vision of PC+. In addition, selecting appropriate profiles for specialists and patients for PC+ are necessary to further optimise the effectiveness and cost of care.
