OBJECTIVE: Meniscal tears occur frequently in the population and the most common surgical treatment, arthroscopic partial meniscectomy, is performed in approximately two million cases worldwide each year. The purpose of this systematic review is to summarise and critically appraise the evidence for the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients with meniscal tears. DESIGN: A systematic review was undertaken. Data on reported measurement properties were extracted and the quality of the studies appraised according to Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments. DATA SOURCES: A search of MEDLINE, Embase, AMED and PsycINFO, unlimited by language or publication date (last search 20 February 2017). ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Development and validation studies reporting the measurement properties of PROMs in patients with meniscal tears were included. RESULTS: 11 studies and 10 PROMs were included. The overall quality of studies was poor. For measurement of symptoms and functional status, there is only very limited evidence supporting the selection of either the Lysholm Knee Scale, International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form or the Dutch version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. For measuring health-related quality of life, only limited evidence supports the selection of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET). Of all the PROMs evaluated, WOMET has the strongest evidence for content validity. CONCLUSION: For patients with meniscal tears, there is poor quality and incomplete evidence regarding the validity of the currently available PROMs. Further research is required to ensure these PROMs truly reflect the symptoms, function and quality of life of patients with meniscal tears. PROPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017056847.
knee, Arthroscopy, Checklist, Disability Evaluation, Humans, Patient Reported Outcome Measures, Quality of Life, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Tibial Meniscus Injuries