Dance Functional Outcome Survey: Development and Preliminary Analyses

Shaw Bronner, Igor Reis Urbano, Shaw Bronner, Igor Reis Urbano

Abstract

The Dance Functional Outcome Survey (DFOS) was developed as a self-report questionnaire for healthy and injured ballet and modern dancers, focusing on the low back and lower extremities. Our aim was to determine factor analysis and internal consistency of the 16 items and to investigate test-retest and equivalence reliability and validity of the DFOS compared to three orthopedic outcomes instruments. Data were collected from 80 healthy and injured adult ballet and modern pre-professional and professional dancers. DFOS Likert-type and visual analog scales were completed twice within 4-9 days to study test-retest reliability. The Cincinnati Knee Rating System, Olerud and Molander Foot-Ankle Questionnaire, and Oswestry Disability Index were used to assess concurrent validity using intraclass correlation coefficients in SPSS, p<0.05. To determine instrument dimensions and internal consistency of the items, we conducted exploratory factor analysis and calculated Cronbach's α in JASP. DFOS demonstrated single factor loading and high Cronbach's α; high test-retest repeatability and equivalence reliability ( r =0.74-0.99) and acceptable criterion validity compared to the orthopedic outcomes instruments (r≥0.67). These results support further study of a revised 14 item Likert-version DFOS for repeatability, validity and responsiveness.

Keywords: ballet; likert scale; modern dance; orthopedic injury; questionnaire; self-report; visual analog scale.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

    1. Anthoine E, Moret L, Regnault A, Sebille V, Hardouin J B. Sample size used to validate a scale: A review of publications on newly-developed patient reported outcomes measures. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:176.
    1. Barber-Westin S D, Noyes F R, McCloskey J W. Rigorous statistical reliability, validity, and responsiveness testing of the Cincinnati knee rating system in 350 subjects with uninjured, injured, or anterior cruciate ligament-reconstructed knees. Am J Sports Med. 1999;27:402–416.
    1. Basmajian J V, Harden T P, Regenos E M. Integrated actions of the four heads of quadriceps femoris: An electromyographic study. Anat Rec. 1972;172:15–20.
    1. Binkley J M, Stratford P W, Lott S A, Riddle D L. The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS): Scale development, measurement properties, and clinical application. North American Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Research Network. Phys Ther. 1999;79:371–383.
    1. Bolton J E, Wilkinson R C. Responsiveness of pain scales: A comparison of three pain intensity measures in chiropractic patients. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 1998;21:1–7.
    1. Bowerman E, Whatman C, Harris N, Bradshaw E, Karin J. Are maturation, growth and lower extremity alignment associated with overuse injury in elite adolescent ballet dancers? Phys Ther Sport. 2014;15:234–241.
    1. Briggs K K, Kocher M S, Rodkey W G, Steadman J R. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Lysholm knee score and Tegner activity scale for patients with meniscal injury of the knee. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:698–705.
    1. Bronner S, Bauer N G. Risk factors for musculoskeletal injury in elite pre-professional modern dancers: A prospective cohort prognostic study. Phys Ther Sport. 2018;31:42–51.
    1. Bronner S, Ojofeitimi S, Mayers L. Comprehensive surveillance of dance injuries: A proposal for uniform reporting guidelines for professional companies. J Dance Med Sci. 2006;10:69–80.
    1. Bronner S, Ojofeitimi S, Rose D. Injuries in a modern dance company: Effect of comprehensive management on injury incidence and time loss. Am J Sports Med. 2003;31:365–373.
    1. Bronner S, Ojofeitimi S, Rose D. Repair and rehabilitation of extensor hallucis longus and brevis tendon lacerations in a professional dancer. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38:362–370.
    1. Bronner S, Turner R.The Dance Functional Outcome System (DFOS): A new measurement tool J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 199929A–20.(Abstract)
    1. Bronner S, Wood L. Impact of touring, performance schedule, and definitions on 1-year injury rates in a modern dance company. J Sports Sci. 2017;35:2093–2104.
    1. Brunier G, Graydon J. A comparison of two methods of measuring fatigue in patients on chronic haemodialysis: visual analogue vs. Likert scale. Int J Nurs Stud. 1996;33:338–348.
    1. Downie W W, Leatham P A, Rhind V M, Wright V, Branco J A, Anderson J A. Studies with pain rating scales. Ann Rheum Dis. 1978;37:378–381.
    1. Ekegren C L, Quested R, Brodrick A. Injuries in pre-professional ballet dancers: Incidence, characteristics and consequences. J Sci Med Sport. 2014;17:271–275.
    1. Fairbank J C, Pynsent P B.The Oswestry Disability Index Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000252940–2952;.discussion 2952
    1. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang A G. Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods. 2009;41:1149–1160.
    1. Flynn D, van Schaik P, van Wersch A. A comparison of multi-item likert and visual analogue scales for the assessment of transactionally defined coping function. Eur J Psychol Assessment. 2004;20:49–58.
    1. Gadotti I, Vieira E, Magee D. Importance and clarification of measurement properties in rehabilitation. Braz J Phys Ther. 2006;10:137–146.
    1. Gamboa J M, Roberts L A, Maring J, Fergus A. Injury patterns in elite preprofessional ballet dancers and the utility of screening programs to identify risk characteristics. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2008;38:126–136.
    1. Guyatt G H, Townsend M, Berman L B, Keller J L. A comparison of Likert and visual analogue scales for measuring change in function. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:1129–1133.
    1. Harriss D J, Macsween A, Atkinson G. Standards for ethics in sport and exercise science research: 2018 update. Int J Sports Med. 2017;38:1126–1131.
    1. Hasson D, Arnetz B. Validation and findings comparing VAS vs. Likert scales for psychosocial measurements. Int Electronic. J Health Educ. 2005;8:178–192.
    1. Hincapié C A, Morton E J, Cassidy J D. Musculoskeletal injuries and pain in dancers: A systematic review. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2008;89:1819–1829.
    1. Kline P.The Handbook of Psychological Testing2nd ed.London: Routledge; 2000
    1. Kuhlmann T, Dantlgraber M, Reips U D. Investigating measurement equivalence of visual analogue scales and Likert-type scales in Internet-based personality questionnaires. Behav Res Methods. 2017 doi: 10.3758/s13428-016-0850-x.
    1. Losby J, Wetmore A.Using Likert scales in evaluation survey work. (February 14, 2012) Available from:
    1. Marfeo E E, Haley S M, Jette A M, Eisen S V, Ni P, Bogusz K, Meterko M, McDonough C M, Chan L, Brandt D E, Rasch E K. Conceptual foundation for measures of physical function and behavioral health function for Social Security work disability evaluation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013;94:1645–1652.
    1. Martin R L, Irrgang J J, Lalonde K A, Conti S. Current concepts review: Foot and ankle outcome instruments. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27:383–390.
    1. Marx R G, Jones E C, Allen A A, Altchek D W, O'Brien S J, Rodeo S A, Williams R J, Warren R F, Wickiewicz T L. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of four knee outcome scales for athletic patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83-A:1459–1469.
    1. McCormack H M, Horne D J, Sheather S. Clinical applications of visual analogue scales: A critical review. Psychol Med. 1988;18:1007–1019.
    1. Motta-Valencia K. Dance-related injury. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2006;17:697–723.
    1. Munro B H.Statistical Methods for Health Care Research3rd ed.Philadelphia: JB Lippincott; 1997
    1. Nilsson G M, Eneroth M, Ekdahl C S. The Swedish version of OMAS is a reliable and valid outcome measure for patients with ankle fractures. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:109.
    1. Olerud C, Molander H. A scoring scale for symptom evaluation after ankle fracture. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1984;103:190–194.
    1. Polit D F, Beck C T.Nursing Research: Principles and Methods7th ed.Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004
    1. Preston C C, Colman A M. Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: Reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent preferences. Acta Psychol (Amst) 2000;104:1–15.
    1. Ramkumar P N, Farber J, Arnouk J, Varner K E, McCulloch P C. Injuries in a professional ballet dance company: A 10-year retrospective study. J Dance Med Sci. 2016;20:30–37.
    1. Smith P J, Gerrie B J, Varner K E, McCulloch P C, Lintner D M, Harris J D. Incidence and prevalence of musculoskeletal injury in ballet: A systematic review. Orthop J Sports Med. 2015;3:2.325967115592621E15.
    1. Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach’s alpha. Int J Med Educ. 2011;2:53–55.
    1. Trepman E, Gellman R E, Solomon R, Murthy K R, Micheli L J, De Luca C J. Electromyographic analysis of standing posture and demi-plie in ballet and modern dancers. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1994;26:771–782.
    1. van Laerhoven H, van der Zaag-Loonen H J, Derkx B H. A comparison of Likert scale and visual analogue scales as response options in children's questionnaires. Acta Paediatr. 2004;93:830–835.
    1. Vianin M. Psychometric properties and clinical usefulness of the Oswestry Disability Index. J Chiropr Med. 2008;7:161–163.
    1. Vickers A J. Comparison of an ordinal and a continuous outcome measure of muscle soreness. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1999;15:709–716.
    1. Yong A G, Pearce S. A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: focusing on exploratory factor analysis. Tutor Quant Methods Psychol. 2013;9:79–94.
    1. Zamani E, Kordi R, Nourian R, Noorian N, Memari A H, Shariati M. Low back pain functional disability in athletes; conceptualization and initial development of a questionnaire. Asian J Sports Med. 2014;5:e24281.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi