Translation into Arabic and validation of the ASES index in assessment of shoulder disabilities

The Greek version of shoulder rating questionnaire (SRQ): Translation, cultural adaptation, a reliability and validity study in patients with rotator cuff related shoulder pain

BACKGROUND

The Shoulder Rating Questionnaire (SRQ) was created in the English language to assess shoulder disorders in six areas: global function, pain, daily activities, recreational and athletic activities, and work.

PURPOSE

The study aimed to translate and culturally adapt Shoulder Rating Questionnaire (SRQ) into Greek.

METHODS

The SRQ English version was translated and adapted into the Greek language using forward translation, expert panel synthesis, and backward translation procedures. A pilot testing has been made in the target population, and the final version was created. A cross-sectional study was conducted in clinical settings with the SRQ and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index. A total of 168 Greek adult patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain were recruited from physical therapy clinics. Τhe reliability of the SRQ Greek version was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients. Internal consistency was assessed using the Cronbach alpha coefficient. Concurrent validity was measured by correlating the Shoulder Rating Questionnaire with the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index using Pearson's correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

The results showed that the SRQ Greek version has excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.99), test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.976), and concurrent validity (r > 0.9). No ground or ceiling effects were found. The standard error of measurement and the minimum detectable change of the total score were 5.55 and 15.38.

CONCLUSIONS

The Greek Language Version of the SRQ is a reliable and valid instrument that can be used to evaluate adult patients with shoulder rotator cuff-related disorders in the acute or chronic phases and in clinical trials.

Validity and reliability of the Greek version of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form

Background

The aim of our study is to prove the validity and reliability of the Greek translated version of the self-report section of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) questionnaire.

Methods

A total of 108 patients with various shoulder disorders were evaluated at two different orthopedic centers. All patients answered the Greek ASES questionnaire as well as the previously validated Greek version of the Disability Arm Shoulder and Hand score. Three days after the first evaluation, a subgroup of 40 individuals was randomly selected to complete again the Greek ASES text to prove its reliability, after the test-retest procedure. Reliability was tested with Cronbach’s alpha, stability by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient and by Blant Altman plot and structural validity with the confirmatory factor analysis.

Results

The internal consistency of the ASES functional score and the ASES total score was 0.925 and 0.750 respectively. The intraclass correlation coefficient between initial assessment and reassessment of the ASES functional and total score was 0.951 and 0.938 (P < .001), respectively. The correlation coefficients correlation between the ASES functional and total scores with DASH total score were −0.881 and −0.759 (P < .001), respectively.

Conclusions

The Greek ASES version proved to be equivalent to the English original version in evaluating different shoulder disorders in the Greek population.

How to Assess Shoulder Functionality: A Systematic Review of Existing Validated Outcome Measures

The objective of this review was to compile validated functional shoulder assessment tools and analyse the methodological quality of their validations. Secondarily, we aimed to provide a comparison of the tools, including parameter descriptions, indications/applications, languages and operating instructions, to choose the most suitable for future clinical and research approaches. A systematic review (PRISMA) was conducted using: PubMed, WoS Scopus, CINHAL, Dialnet and reference lists until 2020. The main criteria for inclusion were that papers were original studies of validated tools or validation studies. Pre-established tables showed tools, validations, items/components, etc. The QUADAS-2 and COSMIN-RB were used to assess the methodological quality of validations. Ultimately, 85 studies were selected, 32 tools and 111 validations. Risk of bias scored lower than applicability, and patient selection got the best scores (QUADAS-2). Internal consistency had the highest quality and PROMs development the lowest (COSMIN-RB). Responsiveness was the most analysed metric property. Modified UCLA and SST obtained the highest quality in shoulder instability surgery, and SPADI in pain. The most approached topic was activities of daily living (81%). We compiled 32 validated functional shoulder assessment tools, and conducted an analysis of the methodological quality of 111 validations associated with them. Modified UCLA and SST showed the highest methodological quality in instability surgery and SPADI in pain.

The Chinese version of the American shoulder and elbow surgeons standardized shoulder assessment form questionnaire, patient self-report section: a cross-cultural adaptation and validation study

Background

The patient self-report section of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASESp) is one of the most validated and reliable assessment tools. This study aimed to establish a validated Chinese version of ASESp (ASESp-CH).

Methods

A clinical prospective study was performed (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04755049; registered on 2021/02/11). Following the guidelines of forward-backward translation and cross-cultural adaptation, a Chinese version of ASESp was established. Patients older than 18 years with shoulder disorders were included. Patients who could not complete test-retest questionnaires within the interval of 7–30 days and patients who received interventions were excluded. Intraclass correlation (ICC) was calculated for test- retest reliability, whereas internal consistency was determined by Cronbach value. Construct validity was evaluated by comparing the corresponding domains between the ASESp-CH and a validated Chinese version of 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36).

Results

A total of 86 patients were included with a mean test-retest interval of 12 ± 5.4 days. Test-retest reliability was excellent with an ICC of 0.94. Good internal consistency was found, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.86. Construct validity of the ASESp-CH questionnaire was good. The major domains of the ASESp-CH were significantly correlated with the respective domains in the SF-36 (p <  0.01), except for the domain of stability of ASESp-CH.

Conclusions

The Chinese version of ASESp questionnaire is a highly validated and reliable tool for shoulder disorder assessment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04255-z.

Spanish translation and cross-language validation of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form

BACKGROUND

The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form is one of the most frequently used outcomes score for shoulder pathology. The patient report section of the ASES questionnaire (p-ASES) is easy to complete, can be quickly administered, and is applicable to a wide range of shoulder pathologies, yet a validated Spanish translation of this questionnaire does not currently exist for diverse Spanish-speaking populations. The purpose of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the patient report section of the ASES to Spanish and to assess its validity and reliability among a culturally diverse group of Spanish-speaking patients, typically seen in the United States.

METHODS

The p-ASES Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form was translated into Spanish using a universal approach for translation and cultural adaptation of instruments. A total of 127 Spanish-speaking patients with shoulder pain were included in the study and asked to complete the Spanish translated p-ASES form, the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) v1.2 Physical Function SF 20a in Spanish and a demographics questionnaire. Construct validity was tested using correlational analysis between the Spanish translation of the p-ASES to the Spanish translation of the PROMIS v1.2 Physical Function Short Form 20a. Reliability was measured using both test-retest reliability and internal consistency (Cronbach α) in a subgroup of 27 patients who completed both surveys at a separate time point.

RESULTS

The p-ASES demonstrated desirable convergent validity with the validated Spanish version of the PROMIS v1.2 Physical Function Short Form 20a with a strong correlation (r = 0.82, P < .04) for Spanish speakers. The Spanish translation of the p-ASES proved to be a reliable tool with a high degree of internal consistency across question items (α = 0.90). The Spanish p-ASES also demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability with a strong correlation (r = 0.87, P < .001) between time 1 and time 2.

CONCLUSION

The Spanish p-ASES is both a valid and reliable tool for assessing shoulder function in Spanish-speaking patients from diverse cultural backgrounds and it demonstrates psychometric properties equivalent to those of the English-language version.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Arabic version of the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI-Arabic)

BACKGROUND

One of the self-assessment tools used in shoulder instability to evaluate patient's quality of life is the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) Index. It is a valid and reliable disease-specific tool that has been translated into many languages. The aim of this study is to cross-culturally adapt the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) Index into Arabic and assess its psychometric properties in patients diagnosed with shoulder instability in order to help surgeons and physical therapists assess patients following an intervention.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-four patients with shoulder instability participated in the study. For validity and reliability, the WOSI, Disability of Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (DASH) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) questionnaire were completed at baseline and the WOSI again within 1 week. For responsiveness the WOSI was completed 1 week postoperative and again 6 months following the completion of a rehabilitation program.

RESULTS

Cronbach's alpha (Internal Consistency) of the WOSI was 0.91 and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.96 indicating high reliability. The standard error of measurement was 90.2 with the scale 0-2100 and the minimal detectable change was 250 out of 2100 (11.9%). For construct validity, there was a moderate significant correlation between the Arabic WOSI, the DASH and the ASES with r=0.60 and 0.62 respectively. The WOSI was highly responsive with an effect size of 3.17 and a standardized response mean of 2.94.

CONCLUSION

The Arabic version of the WOSI is a valid, reliable and responsive tool that can be used to assess patients with shoulder instability.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I, Validity and reliability study.

Validation of a Mobile Version of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form: An Observational Randomized Crossover Trial

Background

The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) questionnaire is an effective tool for evaluating shoulder joint function. The development and usage of a mobile version of the ASES questionnaire has the potential to save time, money, and effort.

Objective

The aim of this study is to assess the equivalence between the paper and mobile versions of the ASES questionnaire and their acceptability among patients.

Methods

The paper and mobile versions of the ASES questionnaire were used to evaluate the shoulder joint function of 50 patients with shoulder pain. This study included patients from the shoulder clinic of Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman method were used to evaluate the agreement (reliability) of the scores obtained by the two methods (paper versus mobile).

Results

Of the 50 patients recruited from March 2018 to May 2019, 46 (92%) completed the study. There was a high agreement between the paper and mobile versions of the ASES questionnaire (ICC=0.979, 95% CI 0.943-0.987; P<.001). The mean difference between the scores of the mobile and paper versions was 1.0, and only 1/46 (2%) had a difference greater than the minimal clinically important difference of 12 points. About 75% of patients preferred the mobile version to the paper version.

Conclusions

Our study shows that the mobile version of the ASES questionnaire is comparable to the paper version, and has a higher patient preference. This could prove to be a useful tool for epidemiological studies and patient follow-up over longer periods of time.

Translation and validation of the Intermittent Catheterisation Difficulty Questionnaire (ICDQ) in an Arabic population

Objective: To translate and validate linguistically an Arabic version of the Intermittent Catheterisation Difficulty Questionnaire (ICDQ) adapted to the Tunisian population.

Patients and methods: An Arabic translation and cultural adaptation of the ICDQ was obtained via the reverse translation method after two sets of comprehension tests within two groups of 10 patients. Psychometric validation included testing the questionnaire on a group of 30 patients. Intra-rater reliability was evaluated by the calculation of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for each item of the questionnaire. Cronbach’s α was used to assess internal consistency.

Results: The study included 30 patients (seven females, 23 males) with a mean (SD) age of 40.6 (15.3) years. The ICC was 0.96, demonstrating excellent intra-rater reliability. Cronbach’s α was 0.96 (>0.9) confirming an excellent correlation between the different items.

Conclusion: This work provides a translated, validated and Tunisian adapted version of the ICDQ that can be used to evaluate Tunisian patients’ difficulties with clean intermittent self-catheterisation in daily practice. We expect that this version will also be helpful for patients in other Arabic and North African countries, although such a hypothesis needs to be confirmed by further studies.

Abbreviations: CISC: clean intermittent self-catheterisation; ICDQ: Intermittent Catheterisation Difficulty Questionnaire; ASIA: American Spinal Injury Association; ICC: intraclass correlation coefficient

Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of the adapted Arabic version of the Oxford shoulder score in patients with shoulder disorders

PURPOSE

The current study aimed to evaluate the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of the translated and adapted Arabic version of the Oxford shoulder score in patients with shoulder disorders.

METHODS

One hundred four patients (average age 45.9 ± 15.2 years; female 78.8%) with shoulder disorders, including impingement syndrome, rotator cuff disorder, osteoarthritis, and adhesive capsulitis, participated. The participants were asked to complete the adapted Arabic version of the Oxford shoulder score, shoulder pain and disability index, and the Arabic numeric pain rating scale. The participants were also asked to complete the second form of the Oxford shoulder score after one week to evaluate test-retest reliability. Two Arabic native speakers translated and adapted the Arabic version of the Oxford shoulder score as per given international guidelines.

RESULTS

All patients participated in the second assessment (response rate = 100%). Test-retest reliability and internal consistency of the Oxford shoulder score were high (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.92; Cronbach's alpha coefficient, 0.91). A significant correlation between the Oxford shoulder score and the shoulder pain and disability index and Arabic numeric pain rating scale scores supported the construct validity of the scale (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The translated and adapted Arabic version of the Oxford shoulder score indicated adequate internal consistency, test-retest reliability and construct validity. The current study suggests that the Oxford shoulder score is a quick and easy outcome measure to assess pain and disability in patients with shoulder disorders.Implications for RehabilitationThe translated and adapted Arabic version of the Oxford shoulder score indicated adequate psychometric properties.The current study suggests that the Oxford shoulder score is a quick and easy outcome measure to assess pain and disability in patients with shoulder disorders.A significant correlation between the Oxford shoulder score and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index and Arabic Numeric Pain Rating Scale scores supported the validity of the scale.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Argentine "American Shoulder and elbow surgeons, patient self-report section" questionnaire

BACKGROUND

American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons questionnaire (ASES-p) has been translated into Spanish, but it has not been adapted to the Argentine population yet. Although Spain and Argentina speak the same language, linguistic differences between Spanish-speaking countries may affect the interpretation of the different items included in the questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct the translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the self-report section of the ASES-p into Argentine Spanish for patients with musculoskeletal shoulder disorders, and to assess its psychometric properties.

DESIGN

Study of diagnostic accuracy/assessment scale.

METHOD

The study was carried out in three consecutive phases: translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation for its use in Argentina. In the third phase, we used the ASES-p, Short Form 36 (SF-36), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaires, and the Global Rating of Change (GROC) scale.

RESULTS

One hundred three participants completed a set of questionnaires on two occasions and were included in the final analysis. The time taken to answer and score the questionnaire was 118 and 52 s, respectively. Neither a ceiling nor a floor effect was observed. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.85. Intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.83. A significant correlation was found between the DASH, the GROC and various SF-36 subscales. There were strong indices of concurrent-cross validation, longitudinal validity, and construct validity. The ASES-p questionnaire showed a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) value of 7.88 points.

CONCLUSION

Some psychometric properties in reliability and validity were acceptable in the Argentine version of the ASES-p questionnaire.

The Dutch version of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form is a reliable and valid questionnaire for shoulder problems

Background

The self-assessment section of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASESq) is one of the most used patient-reported outcome measures for general shoulder problems. This study was performed to establish a valid Dutch version of the ASESq (ASESq-NL).

Materials and Methods

A clinical prospective, nonrandomized study was performed. Translation of the ASESq into Dutch was done following the guidelines of cross-cultural adaptation. Patients older than 17 years of age with shoulder problems were included. Patients who declined to participate or insufficiently completed questionnaires were excluded. For test-retest reliability analysis, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was calculated and an interval of 7-28 days between test and retest was set. Cronbach alpha was used to determine internal consistency. Dutch validated versions of the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were completed and compared with the ASESq-NL to evaluate construct validity using a Spearman rank correlation coefficient calculation.

Results

A total of 92 patients were included. Test-retest reliability was excellent with an ICC of 0.82. The mean test-retest interval was 13 days (standard deviation 4.4). Internal consistency was good, with a Cronbach alpha of 0.83. Construct validity of the ASES questionnaire was good. All domains of the ASESq-NL had significant (P < .05) correlations with the domains of the SPADI and the SF-36, except for the SF-36 domains stability with “physical function and energy" and "emotional well-being.”

Conclusion

The Dutch ASES questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool for the evaluation of shoulder problems and is permissible for implementation into the Dutch health care system.

Test-retest reliability of the ASES-p shoulder scale

INTRODUCTION

Shoulder disorders are common musculoskeletal problems. The self-assessed ASES questionnaire (ASES-p) is one of the most widely used tools for evaluating shoulder function. Its 11 items are divided in a function (10 items) and pain (1 item) dimension, assigned between 0 and 50 points each. Their sum is the scale's total score, with higher values indicating better health status. The current work explores the test-retest reliability of the Spanish version of the ASES-p score values.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The scale was administered twice to a sample of subjects with various shoulder pathologies, via telephone interviews performed at 3-7 days apart. Exact agreement was calculated on an item and score basis. Score variability was assessed with the 95% limits of agreement method (LoA).

RESULTS

N = 161 subjects were initially contacted, and a total of 82 stable health status subjects provided valid test-retest replies. "Do usual sport" was the only item with missing data. Exact agreement oscillated between 67 and 89% per item. The 95% LoA ranged between -5.9 and 6.9 points for function; -13.2 to 11.9 for pain and -10.3 to 10.1 for the total ASES-p score.

CONCLUSIONS

Test-retest reliability in stable patients was considered acceptable for the function and total scores, but not for pain. This may reflect usual pain behaviour, but it also implies that the pain evaluation should be further studied. The ASES-p pain subscore should not be used as the single measure for monitoring shoulder pain. Revisiting the "do usual sports" item may increase the scale's applicability.

Patient self-report section of the ASES questionnaire: a Spanish validation study using classical test theory and the Rasch model

Background

The aim of the current study was to validate the self-report section of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons questionnaire (ASES-p) into Spanish.

Methods

Shoulder pathology patients were recruited and followed up to 6 months post treatment. The ASES-p, Constant, SF-36 and Barthel scales were filled-in pre and post treatment. Reliability was tested with Cronbach’s alpha, convergent validity with Spearman’s correlations coefficients. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and the Rasch model were implemented for assessing structural validity and unidimensionality of the scale. Models with and without the pain item were considered. Responsiveness to change was explored via standardised effect sizes.

Results

Results were acceptable for both tested models. Cronbach’s alpha was 0.91, total scale correlations with Constant and physical SF-36 dimensions were >0.50. Factor loadings for CFA were >0.40. The Rasch model confirmed unidimensionality of the scale, even though item 10 “do usual sport” was suggested as non-informative. Finally, patients with improved post treatment shoulder function and those receiving surgery had higher standardised effect sizes.

Conclusions

The adapted Spanish ASES-p version is a valid and reliable tool for shoulder evaluation and its unidimensionality is supported by the data.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12955-016-0552-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A Systematic Review of the Psychometric Properties of Patient-Reported Outcome Instruments for Use in Patients With Rotator Cuff Disease

BACKGROUND

Many patient-reported outcome instruments (or questionnaires) have been developed for use in patients with rotator cuff disease. Before an instrument is implemented, its psychometric properties should be carefully assessed, and the methodological quality of papers that investigate a psychometric component of an instrument must be carefully evaluated. Together, the psychometric evidence and the methodological quality can then be used to arrive at an estimate of an instrument's quality.

PURPOSE

To identify patient-reported outcome instruments used in patients with rotator cuff disease and to critically appraise and summarize their psychometric properties to guide researchers and clinicians in using high-quality patient-reported outcome instruments in this population.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

Systematic literature searches were performed to find English-language articles concerning the development or evaluation of a psychometric property of a patient-reported outcome instrument for use in patients with rotator cuff disease. Methodological quality and psychometric evidence were critically appraised and summarized through 2 standardized sets of criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 1881 articles evaluating 39 instruments were found per the search strategy, of which 73 articles evaluating 16 instruments were included in this study. The Constant-Murley score, the DASH (Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand), and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index were the 3 most frequently evaluated instruments. In contrast, the psychometric properties of the Korean Shoulder Scoring System, Shoulder Activity Level, Subjective Shoulder Value, and Western Ontario Osteoarthritis Shoulder index were evaluated by only 1 study each. The Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index was found to have the best overall quality of psychometric properties per the established criteria, with positive evidence found in internal consistency, reliability, content validity, hypothesis testing, and responsiveness. The DASH, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, and Simple Shoulder Test had good evidence in support of internal consistency, reliability, structural validity, hypothesis testing, and responsiveness. Inadequate methodological quality was found across many studies, particularly in internal consistency, reliability, measurement error, hypothesis testing, and responsiveness.

CONCLUSION

More high-quality methodological studies should be performed to assess the properties in all identified instruments.

Spanish cultural adaptation and validation of the shoulder pain and disability index, and the oxford shoulder score after breast cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

The Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) are patient-based outcome scores with valid psychometric properties which are widely used for shoulder interventions.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the study is to adapt both questionnaires cross-culturally to Spanish, and to test their reliability, validity, responsiveness, and feasibility.

DESIGN

Cultural adaptation and psychometric validation study.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who had undergone breast cancer surgery referred to an outpatient clinic at the University of Alcalá de Henares, Spain. One hundred and twenty women who had undergone breast cancer surgery, with pain and shoulder dysfunction. Cross-cultural adaptation was performed according to the international guidelines. Reliability was analysed by test-retest reliability and internal consistency. Content and convergent construct validity were measured by the Expert Committee's and Spearman coefficient respectively. Responsiveness, feasibility, floor and ceiling effects were also tested.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty women aged 54.2 (±11) years took part in the study. The reliability was excellent; test-retest reliability was 0.974 (p < 0.001) for OSS, and 0.992 (p < 0.001) for SPADI; and Cronbach's alpha value was 0.947 for OSS, and 0.965 for SPADI. High construct validity was found between the OSS and SPADI questionnaires (r = -0.674). The effect size (ES) and standardized response mean (SRM) was moderate in OSS (ES = 0.50 and SRM = 0.70 (p < 0.001)), and moderate to good in SPADI (ES = 0.59 and SRM = 0.82 (p < 0.001)).

LIMITATIONS

This study has some limitations, such as the group of participants is composed only of women following breast cancer treatment; the measurement took place in a single centre; and all the questionnaires administered were always provided to the participants in the same order.

CONCLUSIONS

The OSS and SPADI Spanish versions are applicable, reliable, valid, and responsive to assess shoulder symptoms and quality of life in Spanish women with shoulder pain and disability after breast cancer treatment.

Psychometric properties of self-reported questionnaires for the evaluation of symptoms and functional limitations in individuals with rotator cuff disorders: a systematic review

PURPOSE

To conduct a systematic review of the psychometric properties (reliability, validity and responsiveness) of self-report questionnaires used to assess symptoms and functional limitations of individuals with rotator cuff (RC) disorders.

METHODS

A systematic search in three databases (Cinahl, Medline and Embase) was conducted. Data extraction and critical methodological appraisal were performed independently by three raters using structured tools, and agreement was achieved by consensus. A descriptive synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

One-hundred and twenty articles reporting on 11 questionnaires were included. All questionnaires were highly reliable and responsive to change, and showed construct validity; seven questionnaires also shown known-group validity. The minimal detectable change ranged from 6.4% to 20.8% of total score; only two questionnaires (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon questionnaire [ASES] and Upper Limb Functional Index [ULFI]) had a measurement error below 10% of global score. Minimal clinically important differences were established for eight questionnaires, and ranged from 8% to 20% of total score.

CONCLUSION

Overall, included questionnaires showed acceptable psychometric properties for individuals with RC disorders. The ASES and ULFI have the smallest absolute error of measurement, while the Western Ontario RC Index is one of the most responsive questionnaires for individuals suffering from RC disorders.

IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION

All included questionnaires are reliable, valid and responsive for the evaluation of individuals with RC disorders. As all included questionnaires showed good psychometric properties for the targeted population, the choice should be made according to the purpose of the evaluation and to the construct being evaluated by the questionnaire. The WORC, a RC-specific questionnaire, appeared to be more responsive. It should therefore be used to evaluate change in time. If the evaluation is time-limited, shorter questionnaires or short versions should be considered (such as Quick DASH or SST).

Reliability and validity of the Finnish version of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, patient self-report section

Background

The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) is one of the most widely used shoulder outcome tools in clinical work and in scientific studies. However, it has not been validated in the Finnish language. The aims of this study were to cross-culturally adapt the ASES to the Finnish language and to study the psychometric properties of the self-report section of the ASES.

Methods

A total of 105 patients with shoulder symptoms answered the questionnaires of the ASES, a single disability question, the Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and the Short-Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36). The reliability of the ASES questionnaire was studied using a test-retest procedure at 2-week intervals. Psychometric assessment was performed by testing the construct validity, internal consistency, the criterion validity, and the convergent validity of the ASES.

Results

The reproducibility and internal consistency of the ASES were 0.83 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.90) and 0.88 (95% Cl 0.84 to 0.91). There were no significant differences between the diagnostic groups in the pain scores from the ASES, and the function score was significantly higher in the instability group compared to the other groups. The convergent validity of the ASES correlated with the SST, r = 0.73 (p < 0.001); the single disability question, r = -0.74 (p < 0.001); and the Physical Component Score of the SF-36, r = 0.57 (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The Finnish version of the ASES proved to be a reliable and valid tool for assessing shoulder disabilities in patients with different shoulder diagnoses, including rotator cuff disease, instability, and osteoarthritis.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2474-15-272) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Evaluation of shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures: a systematic and standardized comparison of available evidence

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to perform a standardized and systematic evaluation of the available evidence on multi-item shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures that are applicable to a wide spectrum of disorders.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted in PubMed to identify articles with information regarding the development process, metric properties, and administration issues of shoulder-specific patient-reported outcome measures. Two experts independently reviewed all the articles identified for one instrument and applied the EMPRO (Evaluating Measures of Patient Reported Outcomes) tool, which was designed to assess the quality of attributes in a standardized way. An overall EMPRO score and 6 attribute-specific scores were calculated (range, 0-100) to describe the quality of instrument performance.

RESULTS

We identified 11 instruments and 112 articles (2-30 articles per instrument). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder assessment, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) were the best rated, with overall scores of 77.4 points, 72.6 points, and 69.7 points, respectively. They have been shown to be valid, reliable, and responsive, with a low administration burden. Acceptable results were also found for the Flexilevel Scale of Shoulder Function, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, and Dutch Shoulder Disability Questionnaire, but some of their attributes need further evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence supports the use of the ASES, SST, or OSS. We recommend the SST for longitudinal studies or clinical trials, the Dutch Shoulder Disability Questionnaire for clinical practice to minimize administration burden, and the ASES or OSS to discriminate among patients' or groups' evaluations at one point of time.

Translation, cultural adaptation, validity and reliability of the Turkish ASES questionnaire

PURPOSE

The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) is a standard shoulder assessment form, which is comprised of objective and subjective sections and prepared by shoulder and elbow surgeons. The purpose of this study was to translate the subjective part of the ASES into Turkish and establish its cultural adaptiveness and validity.

METHODS

The original version of the ASES was translated into Turkish in accordance with the stages recommended by Guillemin. Sixty-three patients (average age: 48.2 ± 13.4; range: 18-74 years) suffering from different shoulder complaints were included in the study. The ASES was completed twice at 3- to 7-day intervals for test-retest reliability. The intraclass correlation coefficient was used to calculate the test-retest reliability, and Cronbach's alpha was used for internal consistency. Patients were asked to complete the short form 36 (SF-36) and the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) for correlation. Validity was evaluated by external correlation of the ASES with the SPADI and SF-S6 questionnaire, which may also be defined as 'construct validity'. The results were analysed using Pearson's correlation test.

RESULTS

The test-retest reliability of the ASES pain and function subscales and total ASES score were 0.95, 0.86 and 0.94, respectively. Cronbach's alpha coefficient for the total ASES was 0.88. The correlation between the total ASES and total SPADI score was -0.82; the correlation coefficient between the ASES pain subscale and SPADI pain subscale was -0.79 (p < 0.000); and the correlation between the ASES and SPADI function subscales were -0.53 (p < 0.000). The highest correlation was between ASES and SF-36 bodily pain, as well as ASES and SF-36 mental health (r = 0.64, r = 0.56, p < 0.000), and the lowest correlations were between ASES and the SF-36 physical component score and between ASES and SF-36 social function (r = 0.28, r = 0.33 p < 0.000).

CONCLUSION

The Turkish version of the ASES is a valid and reliable shoulder assessment form that can be used for numerous shoulder disorders.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Translation of Questionnaires Into Arabic in Cross-Cultural Research

Aims:To describe the translation process of nursing instruments into Arabic and discuss the equivalence issues arising from this process. Method: Review of the literature. Results: The Arabic language is essentially three different languages: Classical Arabic; Modern Standard Arabic ( fuS-Ha or MSA); and colloquial Arabic ( Lahja A’mmeya), which is itself divided into five different regional Arabic dialects. The Arabic fuS-Ha language is the dialect most widely used in the translation of instruments into Arabic. The literature reveals that only a few studies focused on the linguistic issues in the translation of instruments into Arabic. Brislin’s back-translation emerged as the most common method widely used by researchers in studies with Arabic-speaking subjects, but not the perfect one. Conclusion: Linguistic issues in nursing research have not been sufficiently described and discussed in the context of Arabic language and culture. Although there is no standard guideline for instrument translation, the combined translation model is the most recommended procedure to use in cross-cultural research. Linguistic differences between the source culture and the target Arabic culture should be taken into account. Finally, we recommend the use of the fuS-Ha dialect and trilingual translators in the translation of nursing instruments into Arabic.