Oxford Shoulder Score
Objective[edit|edit source]
A questionnaire ofshoulderpain and function. it was devised in 1996 (Dawson, Fitzpatrick, & Carr, 1996) for assessing the outcomes of shouldersurgeryand later was used for degenerative conditions (excluding conditions ofshoulder instability[1].
Intended Population[edit|edit source]
The OSS was designed to assess the outcome of all shoulder surgeries with the exception of instability surgery.
Method of Use[edit|edit source]
It contains 12 items, each with 5 answers. starting with 1 (best/fewest symptoms) to 5 (worst/most severe) which is awarded to correspond to the patient's symptoms. The total gives a minimum score of 12 and a maximum of 60. A higher score implies a greater degree of disability.
In 2009 the scoring method for the OSS was modified so that each of the 12 items is scored from 4 (best/fewest symptoms) to 0 (worst/most severe)[2].
Reference[edit|edit source]
The total score ranges from 48 to 0, after the modification of the score in 2009, a lower score indicates a greater degree of disability.
Reliability[edit|edit source]
the score was found to have a great interrater reliability and test-retest reliability[1].
Validity[edit|edit source]
Evidence suggested the validity of OSS to measure the degree of disability and detect the possible outcomes of shoulder surgery[1].
Responsiveness[edit|edit source]
it was stated that the sensitivity of the OSS can detect the smallest of changes that might happen in response to treatment interventions.[1]
Links[edit|edit source]
Oxford Shoulder Scorehttp://www.orthopaedicscore.com/scorepages/oxford_shoulder_score.html
References[edit|edit source]
- ↑1.01.11.21.3Younis F, Sultan J, Dix S, Hughes PJ.The range of the Oxford Shoulder Score in the asymptomatic population: a marker for post-operative improvement.The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England. 2011 Nov;93(8):629-33.
- ↑Younis F, Sultan J, Dix S, Hughes PJ.The range of the Oxford Shoulder Score in the asymptomatic population: a marker for post-operative improvement.The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England. 2011 Nov;93(8):629-33.
