Patient-rated outcome measures in athletic training: which are most appropriate for our patient population?


Patient-rated outcome measures in athletic training: which are most appropriate for our patient population?




Thursday, September 19, 2013


11:00 am – 12:15 CST


$15 for NATA members/ $25 for non-members


Lam, Kenneth, Sc.D., ATC Assistant Professor of Clinical Research, A.T. Still University


Dr. Kenny Lam is an Assistant Professor of Clinical Research at A.T. Still University. He completed his Bachelor of Science degree in athletic training as well as his master of education degree in human movement at Boston University. He also earned his doctor of science degree (Sc.D.) in rehabilitation sciences from Boston University, where he served as a teaching fellow within the undergraduate athletic training program. Prior to becoming a faculty member, Dr. Lam completed a Post-Doctoral Research Fellowship at A.T. Still University within the Center for Clinical Outcome Studies and focused his studies on clinical outcomes assessment and evidence-based practice. His current line of research revolves around the prevention and rehabilitation of lower extremity injuries, with a special emphasis on sport-related knee injuries.  In addition to his faculty responsibilities, Dr. Lam serves as the Clinical Practice Site Coordinator for the Athletic Training Practice-Based Research Network (AT-PBRN), where he oversees all aspects of education and training for clinicians across the country and the day-to-day function of the AT-PBRN. Prior to attaining his doctoral degree, Dr. Lam practiced as a certified athletic trainer at Rutgers University – New Brunswick Campus (NJ), the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MA), and Boston University (MA).


As athletic training (AT) continues to pursue a culture of evidence-based practice, the concept of clinical outcomes assessment (COA) is becoming the centerpiece of many professional initiatives related to education, research, and clinical practice.  Vital to COA is the use of patient-rated outcome measures (PROMs) during patient care. Despite the importance of PROMs, most athletic trainers struggle with the process of identifying the most appropriate PROM for patient care.  The purpose of this session is to highlight considerations for selecting a PROM, discuss different the types of PROMs, and identify most appropriate PROMs for a highly functional, physically active patient population.

Clinical Objectives:

At the conclusion of this presentation, the learner will be able to:

  • Describe fundamental concepts (i.e., disablement model framework, whole person and patient-centered care, health-related quality of life) and factors (eg, ceiling effects, responsiveness, minimal detectable change [MDC], minimum clinically important difference [MCID]) related to the selection of patient-rated outcome measures for patient care.
  • Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different types of patient-rated outcome measures (i.e., generic, specific, one-item) as it relates to patient care, evaluating health-related quality of life, and measuring change over time.
  • Identify generic, specific (i.e., region-specific), and one-item patient-rated outcome measures that are most appropriate for a highly functional, physically active patient population.

Athletic Training Domain:

Treatment and rehabilitation

Course Level:


Share this