Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the Upper Limb Functional Index

Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas, Philip C Gabel, Antonio I Cuesta-Vargas, Philip C Gabel

Abstract

Background: The Upper Limb Functional Index (ULFI) is an internationally widely used outcome measure with robust, valid psychometric properties. The purpose of study is to develop and validate a ULFI Spanish-version (ULFI-Sp).

Methods: A two stage observational study was conducted. The ULFI was cross-culturally adapted to Spanish through double forward and backward translations, the psychometric properties were then validated. Participants (n = 126) with various upper limb conditions of >12 weeks duration completed the ULFI-Sp, QuickDASH and the Euroqol Health Questionnaire 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D-3 L). The full sample determined internal consistency, concurrent criterion validity, construct validity and factor structure; a subgroup (n = 35) determined reliability at seven days.

Results: The ULFI-Sp demonstrated high internal consistency (α = 0.94) and reliability (r = 0.93). Factor structure was one-dimensional and supported construct validity. Criterion validity with the EQ-5D-3 L was fair and inversely correlated (r = -0.59). The QuickDASH data was unavailable for analysis due to excessive missing responses.

Conclusions: The ULFI-Sp is a valid upper limb outcome measure with similar psychometric properties to the English language version.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flowchart of the translation of the Upper Limb Functional Index (ULFI) from English to Spanish.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Scree Plot of the exploratory one-factor solution.

References

    1. Garratt A. Patient reported outcome measures in trials, Editorial. BMJ. 2009;338:2597.
    1. Cella D, Yount S, Rothrock N, Gershon R, Cook K, Reeve B, Ader D, Fries JF, Bruce B, Rose M. PROMIS Cooperative Group. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Progress of an NIH Roadmap Cooperative Group During its First Two Years. Med Care. pp. S3–S11.
    1. Fayers PM, Machin D, Quality of Life: Assessment, Analysis and Interpretation of Patient-reported Outcomes. Wiley: Chichester; 2000.
    1. Morris LA, Miller DW. The regulation of Patient-Reported Outcome claims: need for a flexible standard. Value Health. 2002;5:372–381. doi: 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2002.54073.x.
    1. McPhail SM, Bagraith KS, Schippers M, Wells PJ, Hatton A. Use of Condition Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Clinical Trials among Patients with Wrist Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review. Adv Orthop. 2012;273421:10.
    1. Gabel CP, Michener LA, Burkett B, Neller A. The Upper Limb Functional Index: Development and Determination of Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness. J Hand Ther. 2006;19(3):328–349. doi: 10.1197/j.jht.2006.04.001.
    1. Gabel CP, Michener LA, Melloh M, Burkett B. Modification of the Upper Limb Functional Index to a Three-point Response Improves Clinimetric Properties. J Hand Ther. 2010;23(1):41–52. doi: 10.1016/j.jht.2009.09.007.
    1. Michener LA, Leggins BG. A review of self-report scales for the assessment of functional limitation and disability of the shoulder. J Hand Ther. 2001;14(2):68–76. doi: 10.1016/S0894-1130(01)80036-3.
    1. Mintken PE, Glynn P, Cleland JA. Psychometric properties of the shortene disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH) and Numeric Pain Rating Scale in patients with shoulder pain. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009;18(6):920–926. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2008.12.015.
    1. Miller LA, Swanson S. Summary and Recommendations of the Academy’s State of the Science Conference on Upper Limb Prosthetic Outcome Measures. J Prosthet Orthot. 2009;21:83–89. doi: 10.1097/JPO.0b013e3181ae974d.
    1. Fayad F, Mace Y, Lefevre-Colau MM, Poiraudeau S, Rannou F, Revel M. Measurement of shoulder disability in the athlete: a systematic review [In French] Ann Readapt Med Phys. 2004;47(6):389–395. doi: 10.1016/j.annrmp.2004.05.016.
    1. Schoneveld K, Wittink H, Takken T. Clinimetric evaluation of measurement tools used in hand therapy to assess activity and participation. J Hand Ther. 2009;22(3):221–236. doi: 10.1016/j.jht.2008.11.005.
    1. Patel AA, Donegan D, Albert T. The 36-item short form. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2007;15(2):126–134.
    1. Smith MV, Calfee RP, Baumgarten KM, Brophy RH, Wright RWJ. Upper extremity-specific measures of disability and outcomes in orthopaedic surgery. Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(3):277–285. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.J.01744.
    1. Germann G, Harth A, Wind G, Demir E. Standardisation and validation of the German version 2.0 of the Disability of Arm, Shoulder, Hand (DASH) questionnaire (in German) Unfallchirurg. 2003;106(13):19.
    1. Greenslade JR, Mehta RL, Belward P, Warwick DJ. DASH and Boston Questionnaire assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome outcome: what is the responsiveness of an outcome questionnaire? J Hand Surg. 2004;29(2):159–164.
    1. Beaton DE, Wright JG, Katz JN. Group UEC. Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(5):1038–1046. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02060.
    1. Beaton DE, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Wright JG, Tarasuk V, Bombardier C. Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity. J Hand Ther. 2001;14(2):128–146. doi: 10.1016/S0894-1130(01)80043-0.
    1. Van de Ven-Stevens LA, Munneke M, Terwee CB, Spauwen PH, van der Linde H. Clinimetric properties of instruments to assess activities in patients with hand injury: a systematic review of the literature. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(1):151–169. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2008.06.024.
    1. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.
    1. Lehman LA, Woodbury M, Velozo CA. Examination of the factor structure of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire. Am J Occup Ther. 2011;65(2):169–178. doi: 10.5014/ajot.2011.000794.
    1. Franchignoni F, Giordano A, Sartorio F, Vercelli S, Pascariello B, Ferriero G. Suggestions for refinement of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Outcome Measure (DASH): a factor analysis and Rasch validation study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91(9):1370–1377. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.06.022.
    1. Angst F, Schwyzer HK, Aeschlimann A, Simmen BR, Goldhahn J. Measures of adult shoulder function: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) and its short version (QuickDASH), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Society standardized shoulder assessment form, Constant (Murley) Score (CS), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Shoulder Disability Questionnaire (SDQ), and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2011;11(63):174–188.
    1. Kass RA, Tinsley HEA. Factor analysis. J Leisure Res. 1979;11:120–138.
    1. Doward LC, McKenna SP. Defining Patient-Reported Outcomes. Value Health. 2004;7:4–8.
    1. Gabel CP, Yelland M, Melloh M, Burkett B. A modified QuickDASH-9 provides a valid outcome instrument for upper limb function. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010;10:161.
    1. Fayad F, Lefevre-Colau MM, Gautheron V, Macé Y, Fermanian J, Mayoux Benhamou A, Roren A, Rannou F, Roby-Brami A, Revel M, Poiraudeau S. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of the French version of the questionnaire Quick Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand in shoulder disorders. Man Ther. 2009;14(2):206–212. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2008.01.013.
    1. Franchignoni F, Ferriero G, Giordano A, Sartorio F, Vercelli S, Brigatti E. Psychometric properties of QuickDASH - A classical test theory and Rasch analysis study. Man Ther. 2011;16(2):177–182. doi: 10.1016/j.math.2010.10.004.
    1. Angst F, Goldhahn J, Angst F, Goldhahn J, Drerup S, Flury M, Schwyzer HK, Simmen BR. How sharp is the short QuickDASH? A refined content and validity analysis of the short form of the disabilities of the shoulder, arm and hand questionnaire in the strata of symptoms and function and specific joint conditions. Qual Life Res. 2009;18(8):1043–1051. doi: 10.1007/s11136-009-9529-4.
    1. Pransky G, Feuerstein M, Himmelstein J, Katz JN, Vickers-Lahti M. Measuring functional outcomes in work-related upper extremity disorders. Development and validation of the Upper Extremity Function Scale. J Occup Environ Med. 1997;39(12):1195–1202. doi: 10.1097/00043764-199712000-00014.
    1. Sambandam SN, Priyanka PAG, Ilango B. Critical analysis of outcome measures used in the assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Int Orthop. 2008;32(4):497–504. doi: 10.1007/s00264-007-0344-7.
    1. Stratford PW. Getting more from the Literature: estimating the standard error of measurement from reliability studies. Physiother Can. 2004;56:27–30. doi: 10.2310/6640.2004.15377.
    1. Heffor C, Abbott JH, Heffor C, Abbott. The Patient-Specific Functional Scale: Validity, Reliability, and Responsiveness in Patients With Upper Extremity Musculoskeletal Problems. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012;42(2):56–65.
    1. Gabel CP, Melloh M, Burkett B, Michener L. The Lower Limb Functional Index: development and validation of the clinimetric properties and practical characteristics. Phys Ther. 2012;92(1):98–110. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20100199.
    1. Lehman LA, Sindhu BS, Shechtman O, Romero S, Velozo CA. A comparison of the abiity of two upper extremity assessments to measure change in function. J Hand Ther. 2010;23(1):31–39. doi: 10.1016/j.jht.2009.09.006.
    1. Stock SR, Streiner D. The impact of neck and upper limb musculoskeletal disorders on the lives of affected workers: development of a new functional status index. Qual Life Res. 1995;4:491.
    1. Salerno DF, Copley-Merriman C, Taylor TN, Shinogle J, Schulz RM. A review of functional status measures for workers with upper extremity disorders. Occup Environ Med. 2002;59(10):664–670. doi: 10.1136/oem.59.10.664.
    1. Dale LM, Strain-Riggs SR. Comparing responsiveness of the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand and the Upper Limb Functional Index. Work. 2012. [Epub ahead of print]
    1. PROQoLD website. .
    1. Paises de habla hispana promueven uso del español en la ONU. ID?=?6370&criteria1?=?cultura.
    1. Badía X, Roset M, Montserrat S, Herdman M, Segura A. The Spanish version of EuroQoL: A description and its applications. European Quality of Life scale. Med Clin (Barc) 1999;112:79–85.
    1. Hervás MT, Navarro Collado MJ, Peiró S, Rodrigo Pérez JL, López Matéu P, Martínez Tello I. panish version of the DASH questionnaire. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, validity and responsiveness [Article in Spanish] Med Clin (Barc) 2006;127(12):441–447. doi: 10.1157/13093053.
    1. Cuesta-Vargas A, Gonzalez-Sanchez M, Farasyn A. Development of a Spanish version of the “Backache Index” Cross cultural linguistic adaptation and reliability. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2010;23:105–110.
    1. Muñiz J, Elosua P, Hambleton RK. International Test Commission Guidelines for test translation and adaptation: Second edition. Psicothema. 2013;25:151–157.
    1. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16:297–334. doi: 10.1007/BF02310555.
    1. Field A. Discovering Statistics using SPSS. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2005.
    1. Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. LISREL 8.80. Chicago: Scientific Software International; 2007.
    1. Alderman AK, Chung KC. Measuring Outcomes in Hand Surgery. Clin in Plastic Surg. 2008;35:239–250. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2007.10.001.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit