Kılıçhan BAYAR, Banu BAYAR, Özge İPEK DONGAZ

Uluslararası Kalça Sonuç Aracı (UKSA- 12) Anketi’nin Türkçe uyarlaması: geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı kalça patolojili hastalarda Uluslararası Kalça Sonuç Aracı Anketi’nin Türkçe geçerlik ve güvenirliğini değerlendirmekti. Yöntem: Uluslararası Kalça Sonuç Aracı Anketi’nin İngilizce’den Türkçe’ye çevirisi ve kültürel adaptasyonu yapıldı. Kültürler arası adaptasyon, çeviri, geri çeviri, uzman görüşü ve ön test olmak üzere birkaç adımda gerçekleştirildi. Anketin son hali geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması için kalça eklemi patolojisi olan 120 hastaya uygulandı. Hastalar sosyodemografik soru formu, Uluslararası Kalça Sonuç Aracı ve Kısa Form 36'yı tamamladı. Güvenirliği belirlemek için test-tekrar test ve iç tutarlılık analizleri kullanıldı. Test-tekrar test güvenirliğini belirlemek için, 60 hastaya Uluslararası Kalça Sonuç Aracı bir hafta içinde ikinci kez uygulanarak güvenirlik hesaplandı. Geçerliği belirlemek için yapı ve ölçüt geçerliği analizleri, sınıf içi korelasyon katsayısı ve Cronbach alfa belirlendi. Bulgular: Test-tekrar test korelasyon katsayısı 0.89 (p<0.05) ve iç tutarlılık analizi için Cronbach alfa değeri 0.901 idi. Faktör analizi, Uluslararası Kalça Sonuç Aracı anketinin Türkçe versiyonunun 3 bileşene sahip olduğunu ortaya koydu. Sınıf içi korelasyon katsayısı değeri 0.91 olup test-tekrar test güvenirliği iyiydi. Bu sonuçlarla Uluslararası Kalça Sonuç Aracı ile Kısa Form-36 alt grupları arasında iyi düzeyde bir korelasyon olduğu görüldü. Sonuç: Uluslararası Kalça Sonuç Aracı kalça eklemi patolojisi olan genç ve aktif bireylerin sağlıkla ilişkili yaşam kalitesinin ve fiziksel fonksiyonun değerlendirilmesinde geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçüm aracıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Kalça yaralanmaları, Sonuç değerlendirmesi (Sağlık Hizmeti), Sonuçların Tekrarlanabilirliği

Turkish version of International Hip Outcome Tool (IHOT12T): validity and reliability study

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of International Hip Outcome Tool in patients with hip joint pathology. Method: International Hip Outcome Tool was translated and culturally adapted from English into Turkish. Cross-cultural adaptation was performed in several steps, including translation, back-translation, expert review and pre-testing. The final version was evaluated for reliability and validity a clinical study of 120 patients with hip joint pathology. Patients completed sociodemographic questionnaire form, the International Hip Outcome Tool and the Short-Form 36. Test-retest and internal consistency analyses were used to determine the reliability. To determine test-retest reliability, 60 patients completed the International Hip Outcome Tool on a second time within 1-week period were calculated to assess reliability. Construct validity and criterion validity analyses included Intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach alpha were performed to determine the validity. Results: The test-retest correlation coefficient was 0.89 (p<0.05) and the Cronbach alpha value for internal consistency analysis was 0.901. Factor analysis revealed that Turkish version of the International Hip Outcome Tool has 3 components. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.91 demonstrating good test-retest reliability. It was observed with these results that there are good level correlations between International Hip Outcome Tool and the subgroups of Short-Form 36. Conclusion: The Turkish version of the International Hip Outcome Tool is a valid and reliable tool for measuring physical functioning and health-related quality of life in younger, physically active, patients with hip pathology.

PDF

___

1. Annabell L, Master V, Rhodes A, et al. Hip pathology: the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging. J Orthop Surg Res. 2018;13:127.
2. Rajeev A, Tuinebreijer W, Mohamed A, et al. The validity and accuracy of MRI arthrogram in the assessment of painful articular disorders of the hip. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2018;28:71-77.
3. Tijssen M, van Cingel R E H, de Visser E, et al. Hip joint pathology: relationship between patient history, physical tests, and arthroscopy findings in clinical practice. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2017:27:342-350.
4. Polat G, Şahin K, Arzu U, et al. Prevalence of asymptomatic femoroacetabular impingement in Turkey; cross sectional study. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2018;52:49-53.
5. Wilson JJ, Furukawa M. Evaluation of the patient with hip pain. Am Fam Physician. 2014;89:27-34.
6. Martin HD, Shears SA, Palmer IJ. Evaluation of the hip. Sports Med Arthrosc. 2010;18:63-75.
7. Enseki K, Harris-Hayes M, White DM, et al. Nonarthritic hip joint pain: clinical practice guidelines linked to the international classification of functioning, disability and health from the orthopaedic section of the American Physical Therapy Association. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014;44:1-32.
8. Thorborg K, Roos EM, Bartels EM, et al. Validity, reliability and responsiveness of patient-reported outcome questionnaires when assessing hip and groin disability: A systematic review. Br J Sports Med. 2010;44:1186-1196.
9. Huch K, Muller KA, Sturmer T, et al. Sports activities 5 years after total knee or hip arthroplasty: The ulm osteoarthritis study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2005;64:1715-1720.
10. Mohtadi NG, Griffin DR, Pedersen ME, et al. The development and validation of a selfadministered quality-of-life outcome measure for young, active patients with symptomatic hip disease: The International Hip Outcome Tool (IHOT-33). Arthroscopy. 2012;28:595-605.
11. Griffin DR, Parsons N, Mohtadi NG, et al. Multicenter Arthroscopy of the Hip Outcomes Research Network. A short version of the international hip outcome tool (IHOT-12) for use in routine clinical practice. Arthroscopy. 2012;28:611-616.
12. Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, et al. Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 2. 1998;14:1-74.
13. Jónasson P1, Baranto A, Karlsson J, et al. A standardised outcome measure of pain, symptoms and physical function in patients with hip and groin disability due to femoroacetabular impingement: cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the international Hip Outcome Tool(IHOT12) in Swedish. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014;22:826-834.
14. Baumann F, Weber J, Zeman F, et al. Validation of a German version of the International Hip Outcome Tool (G-IHOT33) according to the COSMIN checklist: how much improvement is clinically relevant? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016;136:83-91.
15. Polesello GC, Godoy GF, de Castro Trindade CA, et al. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the International Hip Outcome Tool (IHOT) into portuguese. Acta Ortop Bras.2012;20:88-92.
16. Stevens M, van den Akker-Scheek I, Ten Have B, et al. Validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the International Hip Outcome Tool (IHOT-12NL) in patients with disorders of the hip. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2015;45:1026-1034.
17. Watanabe N, Murakami S, Uchida S, et al. Exploring the validation of a Japanese version of the International Hip Outcome Tool 12: Reliability, validity, and responsiveness, J Orthop Sci. 2019;24:652-657.
18. Anthoine E, Moret L, Regnault A, et al. Sample size used to validate a scale: a review of publications on newly-developed patient reported outcomes measures. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2014;12:176.
19. Ware Jr JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473-483.
20. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, et al. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25:3186-3191.
21. Kaya BB, İçağasıoğlu A. Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of short form 36 (SF-36) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Surg Med. 2018;2:11-16.
22. Domholdt E. Physical Therapy Research: Principlesand Applications (second edition). Philadelphia,PA: WB Saunders; 2000.
23. Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, et al. A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:730-735.