Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 1985 Sep:(198):43-9.

Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries

  • PMID: 4028566
Comparative Study

Rating systems in the evaluation of knee ligament injuries

Y Tegner et al. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985 Sep.

Abstract

Many different methods of evaluating disability after knee ligament injury exist. Most of them differ in design. Some are based on only patients' symptoms. Other include patients' symptoms, activity grading, performance in a test, and clinical findings. The rating in these evaluating systems can be either numerical, as in a score, or binary, with yes/no answers. Comparison between a symptom-related score and a score of more complex design showed that the symptom-related score gave a more differentiated picture of the disability. It was also shown that the binary rating system gave less detailed information than a score and that differences in a binary rating can depend on at what level the symptoms are regarded as "significant." A new activity grading scale, where work and sport activities were graded numerically, was constructed as complement to the functional score. When evaluating knee ligament injuries, stability testing, functional knee score, performance test, and activity grading are all important. However, the relative importance varies during the course of treatment, and therefore they should not all be included in one and the same score.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types