Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

The Dutch patient-based Constant Murley score cannot be used interchangeably with the clinician-based Constant Murley score in shoulder arthroplasty patients

Hesseling, Brechtje ; Perry, Sander I.B. ; Hoelen, Max A. ; van Deurzen, Derek F.P. ; Eygendaal, Denise ; Mathijssen, Nina M.C. and Snoeker, Barbara A.M. LU (2026) In Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Arthroplasty 10(3).
Abstract

Background: To find an alternative for the time-consuming Dutch clinician-based Constant Murley score (c-CMS), we assessed its interchangeability with the patient-based CMS (p-CMS) in patients undergoing arthroplasty. Also, we assessed test-retest reproducibility of both CMS versions. Methods: The English p-CMS was translated into Dutch using forward and backward translation. We administered the c-CMS and p-CMS at 2 time points before surgery and 6 months after surgery. Subsequently, we calculated absolute agreement parameters, both between p-CMS and c-CMS, to study interchangeability. For the repeated measurements of c-CMS and p-CMS, agreement was calculated separately to study test-retest reproducibility. Results: We recruited 139... (More)

Background: To find an alternative for the time-consuming Dutch clinician-based Constant Murley score (c-CMS), we assessed its interchangeability with the patient-based CMS (p-CMS) in patients undergoing arthroplasty. Also, we assessed test-retest reproducibility of both CMS versions. Methods: The English p-CMS was translated into Dutch using forward and backward translation. We administered the c-CMS and p-CMS at 2 time points before surgery and 6 months after surgery. Subsequently, we calculated absolute agreement parameters, both between p-CMS and c-CMS, to study interchangeability. For the repeated measurements of c-CMS and p-CMS, agreement was calculated separately to study test-retest reproducibility. Results: We recruited 139 patients from 3 different hospitals. Between total p-CMS and total c-CMS, the 95% limits of agreement (LoAs) were −20.4 to 22.6 with a mean bias of 1.1. For test-retest reproducibility of the c-CMS and the p-CMS, LoAs were −15.1 to 15.7 (mean bias 0.3) and −16.6 to 18.8 (mean bias 1.1), respectively. These LoAs were all wider than the shoulder arthroplasty−specific Minimal Clinically Important Differences found in the literature. Conclusion: The p-CMS cannot be used interchangeably with the c-CMS. In addition, the CMS has become obsolete for quantifying shoulder functionality; shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures with better reproducibility are currently available.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; ; and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Agreement, Clinimetric study, Constant Murley score, Level III, Prospective Cohort Study, Shoulder arthroplasty, Test-retest reproducibility
in
Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Arthroplasty
volume
10
issue
3
article number
100034
publisher
American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons
external identifiers
  • scopus:105041035040
  • pmid:42291510
DOI
10.1016/j.jsea.2026.100034
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
0d1cc97b-42e9-4d1b-8a9c-62e85003b557
date added to LUP
2026-08-11 12:31:56
date last changed
2026-08-25 13:27:39
@article{0d1cc97b-42e9-4d1b-8a9c-62e85003b557,
  abstract     = {{<p>Background: To find an alternative for the time-consuming Dutch clinician-based Constant Murley score (c-CMS), we assessed its interchangeability with the patient-based CMS (p-CMS) in patients undergoing arthroplasty. Also, we assessed test-retest reproducibility of both CMS versions. Methods: The English p-CMS was translated into Dutch using forward and backward translation. We administered the c-CMS and p-CMS at 2 time points before surgery and 6 months after surgery. Subsequently, we calculated absolute agreement parameters, both between p-CMS and c-CMS, to study interchangeability. For the repeated measurements of c-CMS and p-CMS, agreement was calculated separately to study test-retest reproducibility. Results: We recruited 139 patients from 3 different hospitals. Between total p-CMS and total c-CMS, the 95% limits of agreement (LoAs) were −20.4 to 22.6 with a mean bias of 1.1. For test-retest reproducibility of the c-CMS and the p-CMS, LoAs were −15.1 to 15.7 (mean bias 0.3) and −16.6 to 18.8 (mean bias 1.1), respectively. These LoAs were all wider than the shoulder arthroplasty−specific Minimal Clinically Important Differences found in the literature. Conclusion: The p-CMS cannot be used interchangeably with the c-CMS. In addition, the CMS has become obsolete for quantifying shoulder functionality; shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures with better reproducibility are currently available.</p>}},
  author       = {{Hesseling, Brechtje and Perry, Sander I.B. and Hoelen, Max A. and van Deurzen, Derek F.P. and Eygendaal, Denise and Mathijssen, Nina M.C. and Snoeker, Barbara A.M.}},
  keywords     = {{Agreement; Clinimetric study; Constant Murley score; Level III; Prospective Cohort Study; Shoulder arthroplasty; Test-retest reproducibility}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{3}},
  publisher    = {{American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons}},
  series       = {{Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Arthroplasty}},
  title        = {{The Dutch patient-based Constant Murley score cannot be used interchangeably with the clinician-based Constant Murley score in shoulder arthroplasty patients}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsea.2026.100034}},
  doi          = {{10.1016/j.jsea.2026.100034}},
  volume       = {{10}},
  year         = {{2026}},
}