The Brazilian version of the Constant-Murley Score (CMS-BR): convergent and construct validity, internal consistency, and unidimensionality

Rodrigo Py Gonçalves Barreto, Marcus Levi Lopes Barbosa, Marcos Alencar Abaide Balbinotti, Fernando Carlos Mothes, Luís Henrique Telles da Rosa, Marcelo Faria Silva, Rodrigo Py Gonçalves Barreto, Marcus Levi Lopes Barbosa, Marcos Alencar Abaide Balbinotti, Fernando Carlos Mothes, Luís Henrique Telles da Rosa, Marcelo Faria Silva

Abstract

Objectives: To translate and culturally adapt the CMS and assess the validity of the Brazilian version (CMS-BR).

Methods: The translation was carried out according to the back-translation method by four independent translators. The produced versions were synthesized through extensive analysis and by consensus of an expert committee, reaching a final version used for the cultural adaptation. A field test was conducted with 30 subjects in order to obtain semantic considerations. For the psychometric analyzes, the sample was increased to 110 participants who answered two instruments: CMS-BR and the Disabilities of the Arm, shoulder and Hand (DASH). The CMS-BR and DASH score range from 0 to 100 points. For the first, higher points reflect better function and for the latter, the inverse is true. The validity was verified by Pearson's correlation test, the unidimensionality by factorial analysis, and the internal consistency by Cronbach's alpha.

Results: The explained variance was 60.28% with factor loadings ranging from 0.60 to 0.91. The CMS-BR exhibited strong negative correlation with the DASH score (-0.82, p < 0.05), Cronbach's alpha 0.85, and its total score was strongly correlated with the patient's range of motion (0.93, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The CMS was satisfactorily adapted for Brazilian Portuguese and demonstrated evidence of validity that allows its use in this population.

Keywords: Assessment; Clinimetrics; Factor analysis; Shoulder; Validity.

References

    1. Luime J.J., Koes B.W., Hendriksen I.J., Burdorf A., Verhagen A.P., Miedema H.S. Prevalence and incidence of shoulder pain in the general population; a systematic review. Scand J Rheumatol. 2004;33(2):73–81.
    1. Miranda H., Viikari-Juntura E., Heistaro S., Heliövaara M., Riihimäki H. A population study on differences in the determinants of a specific shoulder disorder versus nonspecific shoulder pain without clinical findings. Am J Epidemiol. 2005;161(9):847–855.
    1. Cools A.M., Struyf F., De Mey K., Maenhout A., Castelein B., Cagnie B. Rehabilitation of scapular dyskinesis: from the office worker to the elite overhead athlete. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(8):692–697.
    1. Kirkley A., Griffin S., Dainty K. Scoring systems for the functional assessment of the shoulder. Arthroscopy. 2003;19(10):1109–1120.
    1. Terwee C.B., Bot S.D., de Boer M.R., van der Windt D.A., Knol D.L., Dekker J. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.
    1. Slobogean G.P., Slobogean B.L. Measuring shoulder injury function: common scales and checklists. Injury. 2011;42(3):248–252.
    1. Fayad F., Macé Y., Lefevre-Colau M.M. Shoulder disability questionnaires: a systematic review. Ann Readapt Med Phys. 2005;48(6):298–306.
    1. Constant C.R., Murley A. Constant score for shoulder evaluation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;(214):160–164.
    1. Constant C.R., Gerber C., Emery R.J., Sojbjerg J.O., Gohlke F., Boileau P. A review of the Constant score: modifications and guidelines for its use. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17(2):355–361.
    1. Beaton D.E., Bombardier C., Guillemin F., Ferraz M.B. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25(24):3186–3191.
    1. Guillemin F., Bombardier C., Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46(12):1417–1432.
    1. Cook D.A., Beckman T.J. Current concepts in validity and reliability for psychometric instruments: theory and application. Am J Med. 2006;119(2):166.e7–166.e16.
    1. Barten J.A., Pisters M.F., Huisman P.A., Takken T., Veenhof C. Measurement properties of patient-specific instruments measuring physical function. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65(6):590–601.
    1. Placzek J.D., Lukens S.C., Badalanmenti S., Roubal P.J., Freeman D.C., Walleman K.M. Shoulder outcome measures: a comparison of 6 functional tests. Am J Sports Med. 2004;32(5):1270–1277.
    1. Floyd F. Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychol Assessment. 1995;7(3):286–299.
    1. Moeller A.D., Thorsen R.R., Torabi T.P., Bjoerkman A.S., Christensen E.H., Maribo T. The Danish version of the modified Constant–Murley shoulder score: reliability, agreement, and construct validity. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014;44(5):336–340.
    1. Ban I., Troelsen A., Christiansen D.H., Svendsen S.W., Kristensen M.T. Standardised test protocol (Constant Score) for evaluation of functionality in patients with shoulder disorders. Dan Med J. 2013;60(4):A4608.
    1. Mokkink L.B., Terwee C.B., Knol D.L., Stratford P.W., Alonso J., Patrick D.L. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:22.
    1. Bryman A., Cramer D. Routledge; New York: 2005. Quantitative data analysis with SPSS 12 and 13: a guide for social scientists.
    1. Cronbach L. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika. 1951;16(3):297–334.
    1. Cronbach L. Internal consistency of tests: analyses old and new. Psychometrika. 1988;53(1):63–70.
    1. Orfale A.G., Araujo P.M., Ferraz M.B., Natour J. Translation into Brazilian Portuguese, cultural adaptation and evaluation of the reliability of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2005;38(2):293–302.
    1. Norris M., Lecavalier L. Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in developmental disability psychological research. J Autism Dev Disord. 2010;40:8–20.
    1. Hair J.F. 7th ed. Prentice Hall; Upper Saddle River, NJ: 2010. Multivariate data analysis.
    1. Livain T., Pichon H., Vermeulen J., Vaillant J., Saragaglia D., Poisson M.F. Intra- and interobserver reproducibility of the French version of the Constant-Murley shoulder assessment during rehabilitation after rotator cuff surgery. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 2007;93(2):142–149.
    1. Razmjou H., Bean A., Macdermid J.C., van Osnabrugge V., Travers N., Holtby R. Convergent validity of the Constant–Murley outcome measure in patients with rotator cuff disease. Physiother Can. 2008;60(1):72–79.
    1. Roy J.S., MacDermid J.C., Woodhouse L.J. A systematic review of the psychometric properties of the Constant–Murley score. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(1):157–164.
    1. Dawson J., Fitzpatrick R., Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78(4):593–600.
    1. Christie A., Hagen K.B., Mowinckel P., Dagfinrud H. Methodological properties of six shoulder disability measures in patients with rheumatic diseases referred for shoulder surgery. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009;18(1):89–95.
    1. Othman A., Taylor G. Is the constant score reliable in assessing patients with frozen shoulder? 60 shoulders scored 3 years after manipulation under anaesthesia. Acta Orthop Scand. 2004;75(1):114–116.
    1. Rocourt M.H., Radlinger L., Kalberer F., Sanavi S., Schmid N.S., Leunig M. Evaluation of intratester and intertester reliability of the Constant–Murley shoulder assessment. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17(2):364–369.
    1. Holmgren T., Oberg B., Adolfsson L., Bjornsson Hallgren H., Johansson K. Minimal important changes in the Constant–Murley score in patients with subacromial pain. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(8):1083–1090.
    1. Puga V.O., Lopes A.D., Costa L.O. Assessment of cross-cultural adaptations and measurement properties of self-report outcome measures relevant to shoulder disability in Portuguese: a systematic review. Rev Bras Fisioter. 2012;16(2):85–93.
    1. de Souza M.B., Martins J., Hotta G.H., de Oliveira A.S. Measurement properties of the Brazilian Version of the Penn Shoulder Score (PSS-Brazil): reliability, validity, and responsiveness. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2015;45(2):137–142.
    1. Moser A.D., Knaut L.A., Zotz T.G., Scharan K.O. Validity and reliability of the Portuguese version of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form. Rev Bras Reumatol. 2012;52(3):348–356.
    1. Neto J.O., Gesser R.L., Steglich V., Bonilauri Ferreira A.P., Gandhi M., Vissoci J.R. Validation of the Simple Shoulder Test in a Portuguese-Brazilian population. Is the latent variable structure and validation of the Simple Shoulder Test Stable across cultures? PLoS ONE. 2013;8(5):e62890.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren