Reliability, validity, and cross-cultural adaptation study of the Turkish version of the Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation questionnaire

Background/aim: The aim of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the Turkish version of the Patient-Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation(T-PRWHE) questionnaire for use in the Turkish patient population. Moreover, we aimed to evaluate the reliability and validity of theT-PRWHE questionnaire.Materials and methods: A total of 166 patients with hand and wrist problems were included in the study. They completed the T-PRWHE,the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire, and the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) at baselineand at the 3rd month of the study. Reliability was evaluated by analyzing internal consistency (Cronbach alpha coefficient) and testretest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient). To analyze validity, factor analysis of the T-PRWHE and correlation coefficientsbetween the T-PRWHE, DASH, and SF-36 were obtained.Results: Reliability of the T-PRWHE in terms of internal consistency (Cronbach alpha coefficients for T-PRWHE were found to be0.85) was excellent. Intraclass correlation coefficients were over 0.90. The T-PRWHE has three factors and the correlations between theT-PRWHE and DASH and SF-36 were statistically significant.Conclusion: Based on the results obtained, the Turkish version of the PRWHE questionnaire was found to be a valid and reliable scaleand it is recommended for the evaluation of patient-based pain and disability level in routine clinical practice.

PDF

___

1. Changulani M, Okonkwo U, Keswani T, Kalairajah Y. Outcome evaluation measures for wrist and hand: which one to choose? International Orthopaedics 2008; 32 (1): 1-6.
2. Beaton DE, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Wright JG, Tarasuk V et al. Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity. Journal of Hand Therapy 2001; 14 (2): 128-146.
3. MacDermid JC. Development of a scale for patient rating of wrist pain and disability. Journal of Hand Therapy 1996; 9 (2): 178-183.
4. MacDermid JC, Turgeon T, Richards RS, Beadle M, Roth JH. Patient rating of wrist pain and disability: a reliable and valid measurement tool. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma 1998; 12 (8): 577-586.
5. MacDermid JC, Tottenham V. Responsiveness of the disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) and patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation (PRWHE) in evaluating change after hand therapy. Journal of Hand Therapy 2004; 17 (1): 18-23.
6. MacDermid JC, Richards RS, Donner A, Bellamy N, Roth JH. Responsiveness of the short form-36, disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand questionnaire, patient-rated wrist evaluation, and physical impairment measurements in evaluating recovery after a distal radius fracture. Journal of Hand Surgery 2000; 25 (2): 330-340.
7. Xu W, Seow C. Chinese version of patient rated wrist evaluation (PRWE): cross-cultural adaptation and reliability evaluation. Annals of the Academy of Medicine of Singapore 2003; 32 (5 Suppl.): S48-49.
8. Wah JW, Wang MK, Ping CL. Construct validity of the Chinese version of the Patient-rated Wrist Evaluation Questionnaire (PRWE-Hong Kong Version). Journal of Hand Therapy 2006; 19 (1): 18-26.
9. John M, Angst F, Awiszus F, Pap G, MacDermid JC et al. The patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE): cross-cultural adaptation into German and evaluation of its psychometric properties. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology 2008; 26 (6): 1047-1058.
10. Wilcke MT, Abbaszadegan H, Adolphson PY. Evaluation of a Swedish version of the patient-rated wrist evaluation outcome questionnaire: good responsiveness, validity, and reliability, in 99 patients recovering from a fracture of the distal radius. Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery 2009; 43 (2): 94-101.
11. Amadio PC. Outcome assessment in hand surgery and hand therapy: an update. Journal of Hand Therapy 2001; 14 (2): 63- 67.
12. Imaeda T, Uchiyama S, Wada T, Okinaga S, Sawaizumi T et al. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation. Journal of Orthopaedic Science 2010; 15 (4): 509-517.
13. Mehta SP, Mhatre B, MacDermid JC, Mehta A. Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric testing of the Hindi version of the patient-rated wrist evaluation. Journal of Hand Therapy 2012; 25 (1): 65-77.
14. Hasani FN, MacDermid JC, Tang A, Kho ME. Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric testing of the Arabic version of the Patient-Rated Wrist Hand Evaluation (PRWHE-A) in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Hand Therapy 2015; 28 (4): 412-419.
15. Fairplay T, Atzei A, Corradi M, Luchetti R, Cozzolino R et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Italian version of the patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation questionnaire. Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) 2012; 37 (9): 863- 870.
16. Brink SM, Voskamp EG, Houpt P, Emmelot CH. Psychometric properties of the Patient Rated Wrist/Hand Evaluation - Dutch Language Version (PRWH/E-DLV). Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) 2009; 34 (4): 556-557.
17. Düger T, Yakut E, Öksüz Ç, Yörükan S, Bilgütay BS et al. Kol, Omuz ve El Sorunları (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand - DASH) Anketi Türkçe uyarlamasının güvenirliği ve geçerliği. Turk Fizyoterapi ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi 2006; 17 (3): 99-107 (in Turkish).
18. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). American Journal of Industrial Medicine 1996; 29 (6): 602-608.
19. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical Care 1992; 30 (6): 473-483.
20. Koçyiğit H, Aydemir Ö, Ölmez N, Memiş A. Kısa Form 36 (KF-36)’nın Türkçe versiyonunun güvenirliği ve geçerliliği. İlaç ve Tedavi Dergisi 1999; 12: 102-106 (in Turkish).
21. 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.
22. Cronbach LJ. A case study of the split-half reliability coefficient. Journal of Educational Psychology 1946; 37 (8): 473-480.
23. Roh YH, Yang BK, Noh JH, Baek GH, Song CH et al. Crosscultural adaptation and validation of the Korean version of the Michigan hand questionnaire. Journal of Hand Surgery 2011; 36 (9): 1497-1503.
24. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. American Psychological Association 1979; 86 (2): 420-428.
25. Mellstrand Navarro C, Ponzer S, Törnkvist H, Ahrengart L, Bergström G. Measuring outcome after wrist injury: translation and validation of the Swedish version of the patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE-Swe). BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 2011; 12: 171.
26. Barlett MS. A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximations. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 1954; 16 (Series B): 296-298.
27. Cohen RJ, Swerdik ME, Phillips SM. Psychological Testing and Assessment. Mountain View, CA, USA: Mayfield Publishing Company; 1996.
28. Michener LA, Leggin BG. A review of self-report scales for the assessment of functional limitation and disability of the shoulder. Journal of Hand Therapy 2001; 14 (2): 68-76.
29. Hemelaers L, Angst F, Drerup S, Simmen BR, WoodDauphinee S. Reliability and validity of the German version of “the Patient-rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE)” as an outcome measure of wrist pain and disability in patients with acute distal radius fractures. Journal of Hand Therapy 2008; 21 (4): 366-376.