Dataset Information

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Italian version of the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic Shoulder and Elbow score.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic (KJOC) Shoulder and Elbow score is a reliable and sensitive tool to measure the performance of overhead athletes. The purpose of this study was to carry out a cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the KJOC questionnaire in Italian and to assess its reliability, validity, and responsiveness.

Materials and methods

Ninety professional athletes with a painful shoulder were included in this study and were assigned to the "injury group" (n = 32) or the "overuse group" (n = 58); 65 were managed conservatively and 25 were treated by arthroscopic surgery. To assess the reliability of the KJOC score, patients were asked to fill in the questionnaire at baseline and after 2 weeks. To test the construct validity, KJOC scores were compared to those obtained with the Italian version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scale, and with the DASH sports/performing arts module. To test KJOC score responsiveness, the follow-up KJOC scores of the participants treated conservatively were compared to those of the patients treated by arthroscopic surgery.

Results

Statistical analysis demonstrated that the KJOC questionnaire is reliable in terms of the single items and the overall score (ICC 0.95-0.99); that it has high construct validity (r _s = -0.697; p < 0.01); and that it is responsive to clinical differences in shoulder function (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions

The Italian version of the KJOC Shoulder and Elbow score performed in a similar way to the English version and demonstrated good validity, reliability, and responsiveness after conservative and surgical treatment.

Level of evidence

II.

SUBMITTER: Merolla G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5685985 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe Oxford Elbow Score (OES) is an English-language questionnaire specifically designed to evaluate surgical elbow outcomes. This scoring system has been translated into other languages. Given the lack of an Italian version of the OES, the present study was designed to establish, culturally adapt, and validate the Italian version.MethodsThe OES questionnaire was culturally adapted to Italian patients in accordance with the literature guidelines with a pilot phase including seven patients with elbow problems and seven healthy subjects. The study includes 110 participants from three hospitals, who underwent elbow surgery for acute (70%) or chronic diseases. At least one month after elbow surgery, at the "index visit", the physician completed the Mayo Elbow Performance Index and patients completed the following questionnaires: the Italian OES, the shortened version of the Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH) and the Short-Form 36 Health Survey. Internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach's alpha. Reproducibility was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient in ten patients who completed the OES again two-three days after the index visit. Construct validity was assessed using Spearman correlation coefficients. Responsiveness was evaluated in 68 patients who answered the questionnaires four months after the index visit, using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test, the effect size and the standardized response mean calculation.ResultsCronbach's alpha was excellent: 0.86 (0.82-0.90) for OES pain, 0.92 (0.90-0.94) for OES function, and 0.90 (0.87-0.93) for OES social/psychological. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.94 (0.78-0.98) for OES pain, 0.91 (0.71-0.97) for OES function, 0.95 (0.83-0.98) for OES social-psychological and 0.93 (0.76-0.98) for OES total. The Spearman ? was >0.7 for OES pain and QuickDASH, for OES function and both QuickDASH and Mayo Elbow Performance Index, and for OES social-psychological and QuickDASH. Regarding responsiveness, the mean of the changes between the two visits ranged from 33.9 for OES pain, to 44 points for OES function and OES social/psychological. The effect size and the standardized response mean were >0.8 for all OES domains.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that the Italian version of the OES, translated in accordance with the international standardized guidelines, is reliable, valid, and responsive in patients who have undergone elbow surgery.

Project description:ObjectiveTo create a translated version of the HOOS to fit the Italian population and to test its psychometric properties and validity in hip osteoarthritis (OA) patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA).DesignThe HOOS Italian version was developed according to published international guidelines that include preparation, forward translation and reconciliation, backward translation, review and harmonization, and proof reading. The Italian HOOS was administered to 145 patients (mean age 65.7 ± 11.6 years, 34-89, 58.6% women) undergoing THA. The following psychometric properties were evaluated: internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha); test-retest reliability (Pearson's r and intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC); convergent validity (Spearman's rho between HOOS and SF-36); responsiveness (comparison of pre/post-THA scores, Wilcoxon signed rank test). Interpretability (floor and ceiling effects, skewness and kurtosis indexes) and acceptability (time to compiling, missing answers, and autonomy in compilation) were also evaluated.ResultsTranslation and transcultural adaptation were conducted in accordance with the international recommendation. The translation was deemed understandable and appropriate as to the transcultural adaptation. None of the patients reported to have met any difficulties in reading and understanding the HOOS items. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were good for each HOOS subscale (Cronbach's alpha ≥0.7, Pearson's r and ICC > 0.80). Convergent validity showed the highest correlations (Spearman's rho > 0.5) between HOOS and SF-36 subscales relating to similar dimensions. As to responsiveness, all HOOS subscales scores improved significantly after THA (p < 0.01). Interpretability was acceptable despite ceiling effect in post-THA assessment. Acceptability was good: HOOS resulted easy and quick to fill out (12 min on average).ConclusionsThe HOOS was successfully cross-culturally adapted into Italian. The Italian HOOS showed good psychometric properties therefore it can be useful to assess outcomes in OA patients after THA. This study provided a basis for its use within the Italian Arthroplasty Registry and for future clinical trials.

Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS) into Turkish and determine the validity and reliability of the translated version in physically active patients with hip pain.MethodsSixty young to middle-aged and physically active patients (34 women and 26 men; mean age=35 years; age range: 18-40 years) with hip pain were included in the study. The original version of the NAHS was first translated into Turkish and back-translated into English by two bilingual translators each. The back-translated version was compared with the initial English version by a committee of the four translators. The Turkish version was then tested with 15 patients with hip pain and 15 healthy individuals. The participants were asked whether they had difficulties in understanding the questions. Subsequently, the questionnaire was accepted for use in the study population. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency were assessed using Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha, respectively. The construct validity was determined via the Pearson correlation coefficient between the NAHS and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Short Form-12 (SF-12). Floor and ceiling effects were analyzed. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) were performed to test construct validity.ResultsAn ICC of 0.994 and Cronbach's alpha value of 0.908 were obtained; thus, the Turkish version of the NAHS was reliable. Neither floor nor ceiling effects (15%) were found in the sub-parameters (8.3-1.7%) and the total score (1.7%) of the NAHS. The EFA test showed that this questionnaire had four factors. Model fit indices in CFA were χ2/df=2.23, Tucker-Lewis index=0.90, comparative fit index=0.91, goodness of fit index=0.63, root mean square error of approximation=0.14 (90% CI: 0.12-0.16). The NAHS total score showed an excellent correlation with WOMAC (r=-0.909), mHHS (r=0.850), and SF-12 (r=0.811) scores.ConclusionThe Turkish version of the NAHS is a valid and reliable questionnaire for young and physically active patients with hip pain.Level of evidenceLevel II, Diagnostic study.