肌肉骨骼肿瘤协会评分 (MSTS) 广泛用于评估骨和软组织肉瘤手术后的功能。然而，由于项目开发过程中缺乏患者参与，人们对其内容的有效性提出了担忧。此外，文献报告的数据质量和结构有效性的结果不一致。本研究旨在评估丹麦版下肢 MSTS (MSTS-LE) 的内容、结构和构建有效性。该研究包括来自三个完整队列 (n = 87) 的骨肉瘤或骨巨细胞瘤患者，接受了髋部和膝部骨切除和重建手术。通过将 MSTS 项目与功能框架、核心结果集和半结构化访谈联系起来来评估内容有效性。数据质量、内部一致性和因子分析用于评估 MSTS 的基础结构。结构效度基于 MSTS 和并发测量之间相关性的预定义假设。内容效度分析揭示了有关 MSTS 的担忧。 MSTS 没有充分涵盖患者重要的功能，情感接受项目无法与功能框架联系起来，疼痛和情感接受项目涉及功能之外的领域，并且项目的响应选项与项目不匹配。出现了一个双因素解决方案，其中“痛苦”和“情感接受”项目高度依赖于与功能不同的第二个因素。内部一致性和结构效度显示的值低于可接受的水平。丹麦 MSTS-LE 表现出内容效度、内部一致性和结构效度不足。此外，我们的分析不支持 MSTS 的一维性。因此，MSTS-LE 并不是功能结构的简单反映，并且对总分的解释是有问题的。临床医生和研究人员在仅依靠 MSTS 评分评估下肢功能时应谨慎行事。应考虑使用替代的功能结果测量来评估该患者组的术后功能。© 2024。作者。

The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score (MSTS) is widely used to evaluate functioning following surgery for bone and soft-tissue sarcoma. However, concerns have been raised about its content validity due to the lack of patient involvement during item development. Additionally, literature reports inconsistent results regarding data quality and structural validity. This study aimed to evaluate content, structural and construct validity of the Danish version of the MSTS for lower extremity (MSTS-LE).The study included patients from three complete cohorts (n = 87) with bone sarcoma or giant cell tumour of bone who underwent bone resection and reconstruction surgery in hip and knee. Content validity was evaluated by linking MSTS items to frameworks of functioning, core outcome sets and semi-structured interviews. Data quality, internal consistency and factor analysis were used to assess the underlying structure of the MSTS. Construct validity was based on predefined hypotheses of correlation between the MSTS and concurrent measurements.Content validity analysis revealed concerns regarding the MSTS. The MSTS did not sufficiently cover patient-important functions, the item Emotional acceptance could not be linked to the framework of functioning, the items Pain and Emotional acceptance pertained to domains beyond functioning and items' response options did not match items. A two-factor solution emerged, with the items Pain and Emotional acceptance loading highly on a second factor distinct from functioning. Internal consistency and construct validity showed values below accepted levels.The Danish MSTS-LE demonstrated inadequate content validity, internal consistency, and construct validity. In addition, our analyses did not support unidimensionality of the MSTS. Consequently, the MSTS-LE is not a simple reflection of the construct of functioning and the interpretation of a sum score is problematic. Clinicians and researcher should exercise caution when relying solely on MSTS scores for assessing lower extremity function. Alternative outcome measurements of functioning should be considered for the evaluation of postoperative function in this patient group.© 2024. The Author(s).