Detailled Information

Name of the Instrument/Tool Lower Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS)
First Description

Saleh KJ, Mulhall KJ, Bershadsky B, Ghomrawi HM, White LE, Buyea CM, Krackow KA. Development and validation of a lower-extremity activity scale. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Sep;87(9):1985-94.

Year 2005
Domains
Concept of constructs Physical function, Physical function
Population/Disease Disease specific
Originally developed for ---
Other rheumatic diseases
where can be applied (only if validated)
Osteoarthritis (OA)
Additional population with no rheumatic diseases Yes
Lower-extremity arthroplasty
Language: Originally published in English
Available in Language ---
REFERENCE IDENTIFICATION
Author/s Saleh KJ, Mulhall KJ, Bershadsky B, Ghomrawi HM, White LE, Buyea CM, Krackow KA.
Title Development and validation of a lower-extremity activity scale.
Journal J Bone Joint Surg Am
Year 2005
Vol 87
Num 9
Pages 1985-94
Country USA
Language English
Other references of interest
Link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21251989/
Brief Description

Instruments to assess physical activity in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee: a systematic review of measurement properties

Link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27785671/
Brief Description

A Crosswalk Between UCLA and Lower Extremity Activity Scales

Link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34675009/
Brief Description

Patient-reported outcome measures following revision knee replacement: a review of PROM instrument utilisation and measurement properties using the COSMIN checklist

Instrument/Tool Translations References
No other References.
DEVELOPER CONTACT INFORMATION
Correspondence to Khaled J Saleh
E-Mail kjs3x@hscmail.mcc.virginia.edu
Address Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Virginia, 400 Ray C. Hunt Drive, Suite 330, Charlottesville, VA 22903, USA.
Website ---
Available ---
Links ---
DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTRUMENT
Type Of Measure Scale
Brief Description

Lower-extremity  self-administered activity scale validated for the assessment of patients' actual activity levels.

The scores were spread over the range of the eighteen possible activity levels (range, 2 to 16 for the baseline scores and 3 to 17 for the six-month scores)

Number of Items 18
Range 1-18
Responses options/scale No
Developed for Both
PRACTICAL APPLICATION
Method of administration Self-administered
Recommendations to score

Patients have to choose among 18 options the one that describe best their regular daily activity, 

Score Interpretation Lower scores indicate worse physical activity
Cut-off points ---
Cut-off points applied to Both
Smallest detectable change if described ---
Smallest detectable change applied to ---
Completion time by the patient - minutes
Scoring time by the assessor - minutes
Training to score Not necessary
Strengths Easy to use, Useful in clinical practice & research
Limitations ---
OTHER COMMENTS
Other Comments ---