| Name of the Instrument/Tool | American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society clinical rating scales (AOFAS) |
| First Description |
Kitaoka HB, Alexander IJ, Adelaar RS, et al. Clinical rating systems for the ankle‐hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes. Foot Ankle Int 1994;15:349–53. |
| Year | 1994 |
| Domains | |
| Concept of constructs | Foot health |
| Population/Disease | Generic |
| Originally developed for | Any RMD |
| Other rheumatic diseases where can be applied (only if validated) |
--- |
| Additional population with no rheumatic diseases |
No |
| Language: Originally published in | English |
| Available in Language | Turkish, Dutch, Persian, Italian, Portuguese, German |
| REFERENCE IDENTIFICATION | |
| Author/s | Kitaoka HB, Alexander IJ, Adelaar RS, Nunley JA, Myerson MS, Sanders M |
| Title | Clinical rating systems for the ankle‐hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes |
| Journal | Foot Ankle Int |
| Year | 1994 |
| Vol | 15 |
| Num | --- |
| Pages | 349-53 |
| Country | USA |
| Language | English |
| Other references of interest | |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17331864/ |
| Brief Description |
Reliability and validity of the subjective component of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society clinical rating scales |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17207425/ |
| Brief Description |
Reliability and validity of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Clinical Rating Scale: a pilot study for the hallux and lesser toes |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33091250/ |
| Brief Description |
Measures of Foot Pain, Foot Function, and General Foot Health |
| Instrument/Tool Translations References | |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25012530/ |
| Brief Description |
Analysis of agreement between the German translation of the American Foot and Ankle Society's Ankle and Hindfoot Scale (AOFAS-AHS) and the Foot Function Index in its validated German translation by Naal et al. (FFI-D) |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29138208/ |
| Brief Description |
Validation of the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle-Hindfoot Scale Dutch language version in patients with hindfoot fractures |
| Link | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27163894/ |
| Brief Description |
Italian translation, cultural adaptation and validation of the "American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society's (AOFAS) ankle-hindfoot scale" |
| DEVELOPER CONTACT INFORMATION | |
| Correspondence to | Harold B Kitaoka |
| kitaoka.harold@mayo.edu | |
| Address | Department of Orthopedics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 55905. |
| Website | --- |
| Available | --- |
| Links | --- |
| DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTRUMENT | |
| Type Of Measure | Scale |
| Brief Description |
The AOFAS Clinical Rating Scales are four separate outcome measures that evaluate different anatomic regions of the foot and ankle: the ankle/hindfoot (AOFAS‐AH), the midfoot (AOFAS‐M), the hallux metatarsophalangeal‐interphalangeal (AOFAS‐HJ), and the lesser metatarsophalangeal‐interphalangeal (AOFAS‐LJ). Each outcome measure evaluates pain (one item), function (five to seven items) and alignment (one item). |
| Number of Items | AOFAS‐AH: nine items; AOFAS‐M: seven items; AOFAS‐HJ: eight items; and AOFAS‐LJ: eight items. |
| Range | 0-100 |
| Responses options/scale |
Yes Combination of subjective patient‐reported items (3‐ or 4‐point Likert scales) and clinician‐led objective measures (2‐ to 3‐point Likert scales) |
| Developed for | --- |
| PRACTICAL APPLICATION | |
| Method of administration | Self-administered, Physician |
| Recommendations to score |
Each item is scored from 0 (representing the worst foot status) to scores that range from 5 to 40, depending on the item (representing the best foot status). The items are summed to give a total score of 100. |
| Score Interpretation | Total scores range from 0 (representing the worst foot status) to 100 (representing the best foot status). |
| Cut-off points | --- |
| Cut-off points applied to | --- |
| Smallest detectable change if described | --- |
| Smallest detectable change applied to | --- |
| Completion time by the patient | 5 minutes |
| Scoring time by the assessor | <1 minutes |
| Training to score | Not necessary |
| Strengths | Easy to use |
| Limitations | --- |
| OTHER COMMENTS | |
| Other Comments | --- |