Abdulhamit TAYFUR, Ateş ŞENDİL, Jale KARAKAYA, Nevin ERGUN

Cross-cultural adaptation, validity, and reliability of Turkish version of Identification of Functional Ankle Instability (IdFAI) scale

Objective: This study aimed to develop the Turkish version of Identification of Functional Ankle Instability (TV_IdFAI)scale and evaluate its validity and reliability.Methods: A total of 100 participants (54 men and 46 women; 50 volleyball players and 50 sedentary individuals) between 18and 38 years of age were included this study. The construct validity, reference validity, sensitivity, specificity, and test–retestreliability of TV_IdFAI were evaluated. For the test–retest reliability, the scale was applied to all participants again in 10–14days. A correlation between the scale scores and test–retest results was examined with intraclass correlation coefficient. Toevaluate the construct validity, a factor analysis method was used. For reference validity, a sports physician evaluated allparticipants and the clinical diagnoses were compared with total score of the scale. Sensitivity and specificity were calculatedto evaluate the classification success of the scale with specified cutoff.Results: TV_IdFAI scale was grouped under two separate factors. It was determined that the variance for factor 1, factor2 and for scale was 46.68%, 15.70%, and 62.38%, respectively. There was a statistically significant relationship 0.74 (95%CI 0.64–0.84; p

___

1. Eerkes K. Volleyball injuries. Curr Sports Med Rep 2012; 11: 251-6. [Crossref]

2. Fong DT, Chan YY, Mok KM, Yung PS, Chan KM. Understanding acute ankle ligamentous sprain injury in sports. Sports Med Arthrosc Rehabil Ther Technol 2009; 1: 14. doi: 10.1186/1758- 2555-1-14. [Crossref]

3. Augustsson SR, Augustsson J, Thomeé R, Svantesson U. Injuries and preventive actions in elite Swedish volleyball. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2006; 16: 433-40. [Crossref]

4. Simon J, Donahue M, Docherty CL. Critical review of self-reported functional ankle instability measures: a follow up. Phys Ther Sport 2014; 15: 97-100. [Crossref]

5. Freeman M, Dean M, Hanham I. The etiology and prevention of functional instability of the foot. J Bone Joint 1965; 47: 678- 85. [Crossref]

6. Donahue M, Simon J, Docherty CL. Reliability and validity of a new questionnaire created to establish the presence of functional ankle instability: the IdFAI. Athl Train Sports Health Care 2013; 5: 38-43. [Crossref]

7. Simon J, Donahue M, Docherty C. Development of the identification of functional ankle instability (IdFAI). Foot Ankle Int 2012; 33: 755-63 [Crossref]

8. Peduzzi P, Concato J, Kemper E, Holford TR, Feinstein AR. A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1996; 49: 1373-9. [Crossref]

9. Lynch SA. Assessment of the injured ankle in the athlete. J Athl Train 2002; 37: 406-12.

10. Aslan A, Sofu H, Kırdemir V. Ankle ligament injury: current concept. OA Orthopaedics 2014; 2: 5.

11. de Ce’ sar PC, Avila EM, de Abreu MR. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging to physical examination for syndesmotic injury after lateral ankle sprain. Foot Ankle Int 2011; 32: 1110-4. [Crossref]

12. 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: 3186-91. [Crossref]

13. Geisinger KF. Cross-cultural normative assessment: Translation and adaptation issues influencing the normative interpretation of assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment 1994; 6: 304-12. [Crossref]

14. Ercan İ, Kan İ. Ölçeklerde güvenirlik ve geçerlik. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2004; 30: 211-6.

15. Alpar R. Spor, Sağlık ve Eğitim Bilimlerinden Örneklerle Uygulamalı İstatistik ve Geçerlik-Güvenirlik. Turkey: Detay Yayıncılık; 2010.

16. Izquierdo I, Olea J, Abad FJ. Exploratory factor analysis in validation studies: Uses and recommendations. Psicothema 2014; 26: 395-400.

17. Hair Jr JF. Multivariate Data Analysis Joseph F. Hair Jr. William C. Black Barry J. Babin Rolph E. Anderson Seventh Edition. Chapter 12: Confirmatory Factor Analysis 599-639.

18. Docherty CL, Gansneder BM, Arnold BL, Hurwitz SR. Development and reliability of the ankle instability instrument. J Athl Train 2006; 41: 154-8.

19. Rozzi SL, Lephart SM, Sterner R et al. Balance training for persons with functionally unstable ankles. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 1999; 29: 478-86. [Crossref]

20. Eechaute C, Vaes P, Duquet W. The chronic ankle instability scale: clinimetric properties of a multidimensional, patient-assessed instrument. Phys Ther Sport 2008; 9: 57-66. [Crossref]

21. Hiller CE, Refshauge KM, Bundy AC Herbert RD, Kilbreath SL. The Cumberland ankle instability tool: A report of validity and reliability testing. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2006; 87: 1235- 41. [Crossref]

22. Carcia CR, Martin RL, Drouin JM. Validity of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure in athletes with chronic ankle instability. J Athl Train 2008; 43: 179-83. [Crossref]

23. Hubbard TJ, Kaminski TW. Kinesthesia is not affected by functional ankle instability status. J Athl Train 2002; 37: 481- 6.

24. Roos EM, Brandsson S, Karlsson J. Validation of the foot and ankle outcome score for ankle ligament reconstruction. Foot Ankle Int 2001; 22: 788-94. [Crossref]

25. Karatepe AG, Günaydın R, Kaya T, Karlibaş U, Özbek G. Validation of the Turkish version of the foot and ankle outcome score. Rheumatol Int 2009; 30: 169-73. [Crossref]

26. Hale SA, Hertel J. Reliability and sensitivity of the Foot and Ankle Disability Index in subjects with chronic ankle instability. J Athl Train 2005; 40: 35-40.