Nurten Gizem TÖRE, Deran OSKAY, Mesken GÜMÜŞSOY

Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Cold Intolerance Symptom Severity Questionnaire

Background/aim: The aim of this study was to determine validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Cold Intolerance SymptomSeverity (CISS-T) Questionnaire.Materials and methods: The translation and back translation steps of the study were based on the Beaton guidelines. Sixty-eight patientsbetween 18 and 65 years old with cold intolerance after amputation, replantation, multiple crush syndrome, and peripheral nerve injurywere included in the study. Patients completed the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH), the SF-36Quality of Life Questionnaire, and the single questions assessing the cold sensitivity and cold intolerance once and the final version ofthe CISS-T twice with a 7-day interval.Results: The internal consistency (Cronbach α = 0.844) and test-retest reliability (r = 0.938) of CISS-T were assessed and both wereconsiderably high. Also, the correlations between the scores of the CISS-T, DASH-T, SF-36-T, and the single questions were analyzed bySpearman’s correlation coefficient. The CISS-T showed an excellent correlation with the single questions (rho = 0.8 and 0.877), a goodand negative correlation with the pain subscale of the SF-36 (rho = 0.617), and a moderate correlation with the DASH-T (rho = 0.592).Conclusion: As a result, the CISS-T is a valid and reliable instrument to assess the severity of cold intolerance.

PDF

___

1. Campbell D, Kay S. What is cold intolerance? The Journal of Hand Surgery: British & European 1998; 23: 3-5.
2. Engkvist O, Wahren LK, Wallin G, Torebjork E, Nystrom B. Effects of regional intravenous guanethidine block in posttraumatic cold intolerance in hand amputees. The Journal of Hand Surgery: British & European Volume 1985; 10: 145- 150.
3. Lithell M, Backman C, Nyström A, Lithell M, Backman C. Cold intolerance is not more common or disabling after digital replantation than after other treatment of compound digital injuries. Annals of Plastic Surgery 1998; 40: 256-259.
4. Collins ED, Novak CB, Mackinnon SE, Weisenborn SA. Longterm follow-up evaluation of cold sensitivity following nerve injury. The Journal of Hand Surgery 1996; 21: 1078-1085.
5. Gelberman RH, Blasingame JP, Fronek A, Dimick MP. Forearm arterial injuries. The Journal of Hand Surgery 1979; 4: 401-408.
6. Cederlund R, Isacsson A, Lundborg G. Hand function in workers with hand-arm vibration syndrome. Journal of Hand Therapy 1999; 12: 16-24.
7. Povlsen B, Nylander G, Nylander E. Cold-induced vasospasm after digital replantation does not improve with time: a 12- year prospective study. The Journal of Hand Surgery: British & European Volume 1995; 20: 237-239.
8. Backman CO, Nyström A, Backman C, Bjerle P. Arterial spasticity and cold intolerance in relation to time after digital replantation. Journal of Hand Surgery 1993; 18: 551-555.
9. Freedlander E. The relationship between cold intolerance and cutaneous blood flow in digital replantation patients. The Journal of Hand Surgery: British & European Volume 1986; 11: 15-19.
10. Ruch DS, Vallee J, Li Z, Smith BP, Holden M, Koman LA. The acute effect of peripheral nerve transection on digital thermoregulatory function. The Journal of Hand Surgery 2003; 28: 481-488.
11. Backman CO, Nyström A, Backman C, Bjerle P. Cold induced vasospasm in replanted digits: a comparison between different methods of arterial reconstruction. Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery 1995; 29: 343-348.
12. Carlsson I, Cederlund R, Höglund P, Lundborg G, Rosén B. Hand injuries and cold sensitivity: reliability and validity of cold sensitivity questionnaires. Disability and Rehabilitation 2008; 30: 1920-1928.
13. Ruijs AC, Jaquet JB, Brandsma M, Daanen HA, Hovius SE. Application of infrared thermography for the analysis of rewarming in patients with cold intolerance. Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery 2008; 42: 206-210.
14. Irwin MS, Gilbert SE, Terenghi G, Smith RV, Green CJ. Cold intolerance following peripheral nerve injury: natural history and factors predicting severity of symptoms. The Journal of Hand Surgery: British & European Volume 1997; 22: 308-316.
15. Kurimoto S, Yamamoto M, Shinohara T, Tatebe M, Katsuyuki I et al. Favorable effects of explanatory illustrations attached to a self-administered questionnaire for upper extremity disorders. Quality of Life Research 2013; 22: 1145-1149.
16. Ruijs AC. Post-Traumatic Cold Intolerance in Median and Ulnar Nerve Injury Patients: Subjective and Objective findings. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Erasmus MC; 2009
17. Ruijs AC, Jaquet JB, van Riel WG, Daanen HA, Hovius SE. Cold intolerance following median and ulnar nerve injuries: prognosis and predictors. Journal of Hand Surgery (European Volume) 2007; 32: 434-439.
18. Ruijs AC, Jaquet JB, Daanen HA, Hovius SE. Cold intolerance of the hand measured by the CISS questionnaire in a normative study population. Journal of Hand Surgery 2006; 31: 533-536.
19. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000; 25 (24): 3186-3191.
20. de Vet HC, Adèr HJ, Terwee CB, Pouwer F. Are factor analytical techniques used appropriately in the validation of health status questionnaires? A systematic review on the quality of factor analysis of the SF-36. Quality of Life Research 2005; 14: 1203- 1218.
21. Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand). American Journal of Industrial Medicine 1996; 29: 602-608.
22. Düger T, Yakut E, Öksüz Ç. The reliability and validity of Turkish version of DASH Questionnaire. Journal of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation 2006; 17: 99-107.
23. Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Steiner W, Stucki G. Responsiveness of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index as compared with the SF-36 in patients with osteoarthritis of the legs undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation intervention. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 2001; 60: 834-840.
24. Carr AJ, Thompson PW, Kirwan JR. Outcome series, series editors: DL Scott and A. Silman: Quality of life measures. Rheumatology 1996; 35: 275-281.
25. Valderrábano F, Jofre R, López-Gómez JM. Quality of life in end-stage renal disease patients. American Journal of Kidney Diseases 2001; 38: 443-464.
26. Koçyiğit H, Aydemir O, Fişek G, Ölmez N, Memiş AK. The reliability and validity of Short Form-36 Turkish version. İlaç ve Tedavi Dergisi 1999; 12: 102-106 (in Turkish).
27. Hayran, M. Sağlık araştırmaları için temel istatistik. 1st ed. Ankara, Turkey: Omega Araştırma; 2011 (in Turkish).
28. Hazar Kanik Z, Günaydın G, Pala OO, Sözlü U, Alkan ZB et al. Translation, cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the Turkish version of the Penn Shoulder Score. Disability and Rehabilitation 2018; 40: 1214-1219.
29. Beck C, Bernal H, Froman R. Methods to documenting semantic equivalence of a translated scale. Research in Nursing and Health 2003; 26: 64-73.
30. Squires A, Aiken LH, van den Heede K, Sermeus W, Bruyneel L et al. A systematic survey instrument translation process for multi-country, comparative health workforce studies. International Journal of Nursing Studies 2013; 50: 264-73.
31. Flaherty JA, Gaviria M, Pathak D, Mitchell T, Wintrob R et al. Developing instruments for cross-cultural psychiatric research. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease 1988; 176: 257- 263.
32. Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF. A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2003; 56: 730-735.
33. Ercan I, Kan I. Reliability and validity in the scales. Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 2004; 30: 211-216.