Take the Measure of Osteoarthritis

The last 25 years of WOMAC development have involved an extensive collaboration, as well as the commitment of patients with knee and/or hip OA. In addition to providing a standardized tool for evaluating treatment response, WOMAC data have also been important in informing decisions regarding the proposal of response criteria and state-attainment criteria, as well as AUSCAN. The WOMAC and AUSCAN indices are well placed to meet current and emerging OA needs in clinical research and practice. Given the availability of response criteria (OMERACT-OARSI, MCII75, MPCI, WOMAC 20-50-70), state-attainment criteria (PASS75, BLISS), and population-based normative data, the opportunities for incorporating quantitative measurements into routine clinical practice are great and will hopefully improve outcomes.

Dr. Bellamy is professor and director of the Centre of National Research on Disability and Rehabilitation Medicine and faculty of health sciences at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia.

References

1. Bellamy N, Kaloni S, Pope J, Coulter K, Campbell J. Quantitative rheumatology: A survey of outcome measurement procedures in routine rheumatology outpatient practice in Canada. J Rheumatol. 1998; 25: 852-858.
2. Bellamy N. Osteoarthritis—an evaluative index for clinical trials [MSc thesis]. McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; 1982.
3. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt L. Validation study of WOMAC: A health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes following total hip or knee arthroplasty in osteoarthritis. J Orthopaedic Rheumatol. 1988; 1: 95-108.
4. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt L. Validation study of WOMAC: A health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988; 15: 1833-1840.
5. Bellamy N. WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index User Guide. Version VIII. Brisbane, Australia; 2007.
6. Osteoarthritis Research Society (OARS) Task Force Report. Design and conduct of clinical trials of patients with osteoarthritis: recommendations from a task force of the Osteoarthritis Research Society. Osteoarthritis Cart. 1996; 4: 217-243.
7. Turk DC, Dworkin RH, Allen RR, et al. Core outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT Recommendations. Pain. 2003; 106: 337-345.
8. Bellamy N, Wilson C, Hendrikz J. Community-based normative values for disability derived from WOMAC and AUSCAN NRS 3.1 indices. Ann Rheum Dis. 2007;66(Suppl II):491.
9. Dreinhöfer K, Stucki G, et al. ICF core sets for osteoarthritis. J Rehabil Med. 2004; Suppl. 44: 75-80.
10. Weigl M, Cieza A, Harder M, Geyh S. Linking osteoarthritis-specific health-status measures to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF). Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2003; 11: 519-523.
11. Grootendorst P, Marshall D, Pericak D, et al. A model to estimate Health Utilities Index Mark 3 utility scores from WOMAC index scores in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. J Rheumatol. 2007;34(3):534-542.
12. Bellamy N, Campbell J, Haraoui B, et al. Clinimetric properties of the AUSCAN Osteoarthritis Hand Index: an evaluation of reliability, validity and responsiveness. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2002; 10: 863-869.
13. Bellamy N. AUSCAN Hand Osteoarthritis Index User Guide III. Brisbane, Australia 2006.
14. Kvein T, Zhang Y-Z, Nichols M, et al. Response and state-attainment criteria in hand OA: Analyses from a placebo-controlled clinical trial of CRx-102, a novel synergistic combination therapy. Ann Rheum Dis. 2007; 66(Suppl II):501.