Short Form Health Survey version-2.0 Turkish (SF-36v2) is an efŞcient outcome parameter in musculoskeletal research

Objective: Although the Short Form Health Survey version-2.0 (SF-36v2) is widely used since 2000, theresearchers and clinicians in Turkey have been still using the original version. However, the originalversion includes many deŞciencies and the SF-36v2 was introduced aiming to correct these deŞciencies.The purpose of this study is to indicate differences between SF-36 and SF-36v2 and the present crosscultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the SF-36v2.Patients and methods: The SF-36v2 was cross culturally adapted to Turkish and the measurementproperties of the Turkish version of the SF-36v2 were tested in 50 patients (19 males; mean± SD age:36.9± 14.6 years; range: 16e65 years, BMI; 24.1 ± 4.6) with a variety of musculoskeletal pathologies.Intraclass correlation coefŞcients (ICC) were used to estimate the test-retest reliability. Construct validitywas analyzed with SF-36v2 and EuroQol Group (EQ-5D). The distribution of ceiling andfloor effects wasdetermined.Results: During the cross-cultural adaptation process many changes were made. The Turkish SF-36v2subscales showed excellent test-retest reliability which was ranged 0.80 to 0.95. The highest correlation was found between SF-36v2-PCS and SF-36v2-PF (r¼ 0.75), the lowest correlation was found between SF-36v2-PCS and SF-36v2-MH (r¼ 0.05). The correlations between EQ-5D and SF-36v2 subscalesranged from 0.10 (SF-36v2eVT) to 0.46 (SF-36v2 eRE). We observed no ceiling and floor effects.Conclusion: The cultural adaptation of the SF-36v2 was successful. The SF-36v2 has sufŞcient reliabilityand validity to measure a variety of musculoskeletal pathologies for Turkish-speaking individuals.© 2016 Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This isan open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

___

Ware Jr JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473e483.

Turner-Bowker DM, De Rosa, Ware JE. SF-36®health survey. In: Boslaugh S, ed. Encyclopedia of Epidemiology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2008.

Ware Jr JE. SF-36 health survey update. Spine. 2000;25:3130e3139.

Ware JE, Kosinski M, Dewey JE. How to score version 2 of the SF-36 healthsurvey. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated; 2000.

Koçyi git H, Aydemir EURO, Fis¸ek G, EUROlmez N, Memis¸ A. Reliability and validity of Turkish version of Short Form 36: a study of patients with rheumatoid disorder. J Drug Ther. 1999;12:102e106.

Jenkinson C. Evaluating the efŞcacy of medical treatment: possibilities and limitations. Soc Sci Med. 1995;41:1395e1401.

Taft C, Karlsson J, Sullivan M. Performance of the Swedish SF-36 version 2.0. Qual Life Res. 2004;13:251e256.

http://www.euroqol.org/about-eq-5d.html.

de Vet HC, Terwee CB, Bouter LM. Current challenges in clinimetrics. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:1137e1141.

Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF. A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:730e735.

Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159e174.

Jenkinson C, Stewart-Brown S, Petersen S, Paice C. Assessment of the SF-36 version 2 in the United Kingdom. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1999;53: 46e50.

Jirarattanaphochai K, Jung S, Sumananont C, Saengnipanthkul S. Reliability of the medical outcomes study short-form survey version 2.0 (Thai version) for the evaluation of low back pain patients. J Med Assoc Thai. 2005;88:1355e1361.

Atif M, Sulaiman SA, ShaŞe AA, Asif M, Ahmad N. SF-36v2 norms and its' discriminative properties among healthy households of tuberculosis patients in Malaysia. Qual Life Res. 2013;22:1955e1964.

ten Klooster PM, Vonkeman HE, Taal E, et al. Performance of the Dutch SF-36 version 2 as a measure of health-related quality of life in patients with rheu- matoid arthritis. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2013;8:11e77.