Sinan Oğuzkaya, Abdulhamit Mısır, Turan Bilge Kızkapan, Erdal Uzun, Mustafa Özçamdallı, Murat Önder

Translation, cultural adaptation, and validation of the Turkish-specific acromioclavicular score

Objective: The Specific Acromioclavicular Score (SACS) is a questionnaire that assesses functional outcomes for Acromioclavicular Joint (ACJ) pathologies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ease of use, reliability, and validity of the Turkish-translated and culturally adapted form of the SACS. Methods: The SACS was translated into Turkish according to Beaton’s recommendations. Seventy-eight patients were included in this study (67 with acute or chronic AC instability and 11 with symptomatic ACJ arthritis). The mean interval between test and retest was 13.2 ± 4.6 days. The reliability of the tools was measured with the intraclass correlation coefficient. External validity was evaluated using correlations between the SACS, Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Shoulder score, and the SF-36 version 2 (SF-36v2). Floor and ceiling effects were also analyzed. Results: The mean time to complete the Turkish SACS was 3 min 18 s (range, 1 min 40 s to 7 min 9 s). The test–retest reliability was excellent (ICC, 0.988). There was a very good correlation between SACS, OSS, SPADI, and ASES scores (r = 0.645, 0.645, and −0.682, respectively, P < 0.05). A poor correlation was observed between SACS and subscales of SF-36v2 (P > 0.05). No floor or ceiling effects were detected. Conclusion: The Turkish version of the SACS is a reliable and valid tool to measure outcomes after various types of acromioclavicular joint pathologies.

PDF

___

1. Mall NA, Foley E, Chalmers PN, Cole BJ, Romeo AA, Bach BRJr. Degenerative joint disease of the acromioclavicular joint: A review. Am J Sports Med. 2013;41 (11):2684-2692. 10.1177/0363546513485359
2. Cook JB, Tokish JM. Surgical management of acromioclavicular dislocations. Clin Sports Med. 2014;33(4):721-737. 10.1016/j.csm.2014.06.009
3. Muench LN, Kia C, Jerliu A, et al. Functional and radiographic outcomes after anatomic coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction for type iii/v acromioclavicular joint injuries. Orthop J Sports Med. 2019;7(11):2325967119884539. 10. 1177/2325967119884539
4. Granville-Chapman J, Torrance E, Rashid A, Funk L. The Rockwood classification in acute acromioclavicular joint injury does not correlate with symptoms. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2018;26(2):2309499018777886. 10.1177/ 2309499018777886
5. Wang YC, M AY, Y UW, Wang H. Surgical treatment of acute Rockwood III acromioclavicular dislocations—Comparative study between two flip-button techniques. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):4447. 10.1038/s41598-020-61488-z
6. Nascimento AT, Claudio GK. Functional and radiological evaluation of acute acromioclavicular dislocation treated with anchors without eyelet: Comparison with other techniques. Rev Bras Ortop. 2016;51(5):561-568. 10.1016/j.rboe. 2016.08.015
7. Abat F, Gich I, Natera L, Besalduch M, Sarasquete J. Clinical factors that affect perceived quality of life in arthroscopic reconstruction for acromioclavicular joint dislocation. Rev Esp Cir Ortop Traumatol. 2018;62(2):121-126. 10.1016/j. recot.2017.10.006
8. Reintgen C, Gerlach EB, Schoch BS, et al. What outcome measures are reported in the management of acromioclavicular joint injuries? Orthop J Sports Med. 2020;8(1):2325967119892322. 10.1177/2325967119892322
9. van Bergen CJA, van Bemmel AF, Alta TDW, van Noort A. New insights in the treatment of acromioclavicular separation. World J Orthop. 2017;8(12):861-873. 10.5312/wjo.v8.i12.861
10. Korsten K, Gunning AC, Leenen Luke PH. Operative or conservative treatment in patients with Rockwood type III acromioclavicular dislocation: A systematic review and update of current literature. Int Orthop. 2014;38(4):831-838. 10. 1007/s00264-013-2143-7
11. De Carli A, Lanzetti RM, Ciompi A, Lupariello D, Rota P, Ferretti A. Acromioclavicular third degree dislocation: Surgical treatment in acute cases. J Orthop Surg Res. 2015;10:13. 10.1186/s13018-014-0150-z
12. Barwood SA, French JA, Watson LA, Balster SM, Hoy GA, Pizzari T. The Specific AC Score (SACS): A new and validated method of assessment of isolated acromioclavicular joint pathology. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018;27 (12):2214-2223. 10.1016/j.jse.2018.04.026
13. 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(24):3186-3191. 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
14. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78-B(4):593-600. 10.1302/ 0301-620X.78B4.0780593
15. Richards RR, An KN, Bigliani LU, et al. A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1994;3(6):347-352. 10.1016/ S1058-2746(09)80019-0
16. Roach KE, Budiman-Mak E, Songsiridej N, Lertratanakul Y. Development of a shoulder pain and disability index. Arthritis Care Res. 1991;4(4):143-149. 10. 1002/art.1790040403
17. Paul A, Lewis M, Shadforth MF, Croft PR, Van Der Windt DA, Hay EM. A comparison of four shoulder-specific questionnaires in primary care. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(10):1293-1299. 10.1136/ard.2003.012088
18. Brazier JE, Harper R, Jones NM, et al. Validating the SF-36 health survey questionnaire: New outcome measure for primary care. BMJ. 1992;305 (6846):160-164. 10.1136/bmj.305.6846.160
19. Laucis NC, Hays RD, Bhattacharyya T. Scoring the SF-36 in Orthopaedics: A Brief Guide. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(19):1628-1634. 10.2106/JBJS.O. 00030
20. 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(8):730-735. 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00084-2
21. McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: Are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res. 1995;4(4):293-307. 10.1007/BF01593882
22. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):159-174. 10.2307/2529310
23. Haragus H, Prejbeanu R, Patrascu J, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Romanian Oxford Shoulder Score. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97 (23):e10926. 10.1097/MD.0000000000010926
24. Vascellari A, Schiavetti S, Rebuzzi E, Coletti N. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Italian version of the Nottingham Clavicle Score (NCS). Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2015;135(11):1561-1566. 10.1007/ s00402-015-2301-z
25. Mazzoni B, Cucchi D, Giovannelli T, Paci M, Arrigoni P, Nicoletti S. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the Italian version of the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score. Int Orthop. 2019;43(9):2125-2129. 10.1007/ s00264-018-4215-1
26. Harput G, Tok D, Ulusoy B, et al. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the anterior cruciate ligament-return to sport after injury (ACL-RSI) scale into Turkish. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017;25(1):159-164. 10.1007/ s00167-016-4288-6
27. Çelik D, Çoban Ö. Short Form Health Survey version-2.0 Turkish (SF-36v2) is an efficient outcome parameter in musculoskeletal research. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2016;50(5):558-561. 10.1016/j.aott.2016.08.013
28. Celik D, Atalar AC, Demirhan M, Dirican A. Translation, cultural adaptation, validity and reliability of the Turkish ASES questionnaire. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(9):2184-2189. 10.1007/s00167- 012-2183-3
29. Tuğay U, Tuğay N, Gelecek N, Oxford Shoulder ÖM. Score: Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Turkish version. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2011;131(5):687-694. 10.1007/s00402-010-1242-9
30. Bumin G, Tüzün EH, Tonga E. The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI): Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the Turkish version. J Back Musculoskeletal Rehab. 2008;21(1):57-62. 10.3233/BMR2008-21108
31. Celik D. Turkish version of the modified Constant-Murley score and standardized test protocol: Reliability and validity. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2016;50(1):69-75. 10.3944/AOTT.2016.14.0354