Cross-cultural translation and measurement properties of the Polish version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2013, Pages

  Paradowski, Przemysław T ^a,b,c   Witoński, Dariusz ^a   Keska, Rafał ^a   Roos, Ewa M ^d  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF LODZ   (Poland)

^b SUNDERBY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^c HAUGESUND HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Anterior cruciate ligament; Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score; Orthopedic surgery; Patient reported outcome; Psychometrics; Validation study

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION; ARTICLE; CONSTRUCT VALIDITY; CORRELATION COEFFICIENT; CRONBACH ALPHA COEFFICIENT; DAILY LIFE ACTIVITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; KNEE INJURY AND OSTEOARTHRITIS OUTCOME SCORE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT ERROR; PAIN ASSESSMENT; POLAND; POSTOPERATIVE PAIN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SHORT FORM 36; TEST RETEST RELIABILITY;

AGED; ANTERIOR CRUCIATE LIGAMENT RECONSTRUCTION; CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; FEMALE; HEALTH STATUS INDICATORS; HUMANS; KNEE INJURIES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS, KNEE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); POLAND; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TRANSLATIONS;

EID: 84879445649     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14777525     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-11-107     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Guillemin F. Functional disability and quality-of-life assessment in clinical practice. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2000, 39(Suppl 1):17-23.
2. Vander Zee KI, Sanderman R, Heyink J. A comparison of two multidimensional measures of health status: the Nottingham Health Profile and the RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0. Qual Life Res 1996, 5:165-174. 10.1007/BF00435982, 8901380.
3. Spertus JA. Key issues in outcomes research. evolving applications for patient-centered health status measures. Circulation 2008, 118:2103-2110. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.747568, 19001034.
4. Pynsent PB. Choosing an outcome measure. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2001, 83:792-794. 10.1302/0301-620X.83B6.11973, 11521915.
5. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000, 25:3186-3191.
6. Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD. Knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) - development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1998, 28:88-96.
7. Roos EM, Roos HP, Ekdahl C, Lohmander LS. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) - validation of a Swedish version. Scand J Med Sci Sports 1998, 8:439-448.
8. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. http://www.koos.nu/index.html.
9. Xie F, Li SC, Roos EM, Fong KY, Lo NN, Yeo SJ, Yang KY, Yeo W, Chong HC, Thumboo J. Crosscultural adaptation and validation of Singapore English and Chinese versions of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in Asians with knee osteoarthritis in Singapore. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2006, 14:1098-1103. 10.1016/j.joca.2006.05.005, 16814575.
10. Salavati M, Mazaheri M, Negahban H, Sohani SM, Ebrahimian MR, Ebrahimi I, Kazemnejad A, Salavati M. Validation of a Persian-version of Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in Iranians with knee injuries. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2008, 16:1178-1182. 10.1016/j.joca.2008.03.004, 18411065.
11. Ornetti P, Parratte S, Gossec L, Tavernier C, Argenson JN, Roos EM, Guillemin F, Maillefert JF. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the French version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in knee osteoarthritis patients. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2008, 16:423-428. 10.1016/j.joca.2007.08.007, 17905602.
12. de Groot IB, Favejee MM, Reijman M, Verhaar JAN, Terwee CB. The Dutch version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score: a validation study. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008, 6:16. 10.1186/1477-7525-6-16, 2289810, 18302729.
13. Goncalves RS, Cabriy J, Pinheirox JP, Ferreirak PL. Crosscultural adaptation and validation of the Portuguese version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009, 17:1156-1162. 10.1016/j.joca.2009.01.009, 19303082.
14. Nakamura N, Takeuchi R, Sawaguchi T, Ishikawa H, Saito T, Goldhahn S. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Japanese Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS). J Orthop Sci 2011, 16:516-523. 10.1007/s00776-011-0112-9, 21766211.
15. Draper V, Ladd C. Subjective evaluation of function following moderately accelerated rehabilitation of anterior cruciate ligament reconstructed knees. J Athl Train 1993, 28:38-41. 1317889, 16558202.
16. Roos EM, Toksvig-Larsen S. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) - validation and comparison to the WOMAC in total knee replacement. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003, 1:17. 10.1186/1477-7525-1-17, 161802, 12801417.
17. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD. SF-36 physical and mental health summary scales: a user's manual 1994, Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center.
18. Żołnierczyk-Zreda D. The Polish version of the SF-36v2 questionnaire for the quality of life assessment (article in Polish). Przegl Lek 2010, 67:1302-1307.
19. McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate?. Qual Life Res 1995, 4:293-307. 10.1007/BF01593882, 7550178.
20. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IR. Psychometric Theory 1994, New York: McGraw-Hill, 3.
21. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977, 33:159-174. 10.2307/2529310, 843571.
22. Terwee CB, Dekker FW, Wiersinga WM, Prummel MF, Bossuyt PM. On assessing responsiveness of health-related quality of life instruments: guidelines for instrument evaluation. Qual Life Res 2003, 12:349-362. 10.1023/A:1023499322593, 12797708.
23. Atkinson G, Nevill AM. Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. Sports Med 1998, 26:217-238. 10.2165/00007256-199826040-00002, 9820922.
24. de Vet HC, Bouter LM, Bezemer PD, Beurskens AJ. Reproducibility and responsiveness of evaluative outcome measures. Theoretical considerations illustrated by an empirical example. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2001, 17:479-487.
25. de Vet HC, Ostelo RW, Terwee CB, van der Roer N, Knol DL, Beckerman H, Boers M, Bouter LM. Minimally important change developed by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach. Qual Life Res 2007, 16:131-142. 10.1007/s11136-006-9109-9, 2778628, 17033901.
26. Roos EM, Lohmander LS. The Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS): from joint injury to osteoarthritis. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003, 1:64. 10.1186/1477-7525-1-64, 280702, 14613558.
27. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Jaeschke R. How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. Quality of Life and Pharmacoeconomics in Clinical Trials 1996, Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, Spilker B.
28. Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care 1989, 27(3 Suppl):S178-S189.
29. Lind M, Menhert F, Pedersen AB. The first results from the Danish ACL reconstruction registry: epidemiologic and 2 year follow-up results from 5,818 knee ligament reconstructions. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2009, 17:117-124. 10.1007/s00167-008-0654-3, 18974970.
30. Deyo RA, Diehr P, Patrick DL. Reproducibility and responsiveness of health status measures. Statistics and strategies for evaluation. Control Clin Trials 1991, 12:142S-158S. 10.1016/S0197-2456(05)80019-4, 1663851.
31. Consensus-based standards for the selection of health measurement instruments. http://www.cosmin.nl/index.php.
32. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. 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. 10.1186/1471-2288-10-22, 2848183, 20298572.
33. Angst F. The new COSMIN guidelines confront traditional concepts of responsiveness. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011, 11:152. 10.1186/1471-2288-11-152, 3231875, 22099330.