Turkish Validity and Reliability Study of the Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Replacement Expectations Survey

Year 2023, Issue: 19, 46 - 57, 29.04.2023

Arzu Erden Murat Emirzeoğlu Emre Şenocak Adem Aktürk Nurhayat Korkmaz Osman Aynacı İlhan Kaan Çelebi Mehmet Emre Baki Hafız Aydın

https://doi.org/10.38079/igusabder.1168090

Abstract

Aim: The aim of the study was to examine the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Replacement Expectations Survey.
Method: One hundred four participants (Female: 81/Male: 23) with total knee arthroplasty indications were included in the study. The survey assessing the expectations of the patients from knee replacement surgery consists of 19 items. The factor analysis method was used to evaluate construct validity. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used to calculate concurrent validity, which is another measurement method in which patients specify their expectation levels. The reliability of the survey was evaluated by using test-retest, item analysis, and internal consistency Cronbach's alpha coefficient.
Results: The mean age of the participants was 60.25±9.72 years. The sample adequacy index was 0.884. As a result of the factor analysis, it was found that 65.95% of the total variance was explained, and it was unidimensional as in the original form of the questionnaire. The Turkish version of the questionnaire was found to be perfectly reliable regarding the internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach's alpha=0.929). A significant correlation was found between test-retest analysis results (r=0.564; p=0.002). According to the concurrent validity results, a significant relationship was found between the questionnaire and the VAS (r=0.446; p<0.001).
Conclusion: The Turkish version of the Hospital for Special Surgery Knee Replacement Expectations Survey is a valid, reliable, and easily applicable assessment tool with 19 items.

Keywords

Knee, replacement, expectation, survey, reliability and validity, surgery

Özel Cerrahi Hastanesi Diz Replasman Cerrahisi Hasta Beklenti Anketi’nin Türkçe Geçerlilik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı Özel Cerrahi Hastanesi Diz Replasman Ameliyatı Hasta Beklenti Anketi’nin Türkçe versiyonunun geçerlilik ve güvenirliğini incelemektir.
Yöntem: Bu çalışmaya total diz artroplasti endikasyonuna sahip 104 gönüllü hasta (Kadın: 81/Erkek:23), dâhil edildi. Hastaların diz replasman cerrahisinden beklentilerini sorgulayan anket 19 maddeden oluşmaktadır. Yapı geçerliliğinin değerlendirilmesinde faktör analizi yöntemi kullanıldı. Eşzamanlı geçerliliği hesaplamak için hastaların beklenti düzeylerini belirttikleri diğer ölçüm yöntemi olan Visuel Analog Skalası (VAS) kullanıldı. Anketin güvenilirliği, test-tekrar test, madde analizi ile iç tutarlılık Cronbach’s alfa katsayısı ile değerlendirildi.
Bulgular: Katılımcıların yaş ortalaması 60,25±9,72 yıl idi. Örneklem yeterlilik endeksi 0.884 idi. Faktör analizi sonucunda toplam varyansın %65,95’nin açıklandığı ve anketin özgün formundaki gibi tek boyutlu olduğu bulgusuna ulaşıldı. Anketin Türkçe versiyonu iç tutarlılık katsayısı bakımından mükemmel derecede güvenilir bulundu (Cronbach's alfa=0,929). Test-tekrar test analiz sonuçları arasında anlamlı ilişki bulundu (r=0,564; p=0,002). Eş zamanlı geçerlilik sonuçlarına göre anket ile VAS arasında anlamlı ilişki bulundu (r=0,446; p<0,001).
Sonuç: Özel Cerrahi Hastanesi Diz Replasman Ameliyatı Hasta Beklenti Anketi’nin Türkçe versiyonu 19 madde ile geçerli, güvenilir ve kolay uygulanabilir bir değerlendirme aracıdır.

Keywords

Diz, replasman, beklenti, anket, geçerlilik ve güvenirlik, cerrahi

References

• Carr AJ, Robertsson O, Graves S, et al. Knee replacement. Lancet. 2012;379(9823):1331-1340. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60752-6.
• Price AJ, Alvand A, Troelsen A, et al. Knee replacement. Lancet. 2018;392(10158):1672 1682. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32344-4.
• Turkiewicz A, Petersson IF, Björk J, et al. Current and future impact of osteoarthritis on health care: A population-based study with projections to year 2032. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2014;22(11):1826-1832. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2014.07.015.
• Dieppe P, Lim K, Lohmander S. Who should have knee joint replacement surgery for osteoarthritis? Int J Rheum Dis. 2011;14(2):175-180. doi:10.1111/j.1756-185X.2011.01611.x.
• Culliford DJ, Maskell J, Beard DJ, Murray DW, Price AJ, Arden NK. Temporal trends in hip and knee replacement in the United Kingdom: 1991 to 2006. J Bone Jt Surg - Ser B. 2010;92(1):130-135. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.92B1.22654.
• Nilsdotter AK, Petersson IF, Roos EM, Lohmander LS. Predictors of patient relevant outcome after total hip replacement for osteoarthritis: A prospective study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62(10):923-930. doi:10.1136/ard.62.10.923.
• Jones CA, Voaklander DC, Suarez-Almazor ME. Determinants of function after total knee arthroplasty. Phys Ther. 2003;83(8):696-706. doi:10.1093/ptj/83.8.696.
• Judge A, Arden NK, Cooper C, et al. Predictors of outcomes of total knee replacement surgery. Rheumatol (United Kingdom). 2012;51(10):1804-1813. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kes075.
• Deakin AH, Smith MA, Wallace DT, Smith EJ, Sarungi M. Fulfilment of preoperative expectations and postoperative patient satisfaction after total knee replacement. A prospective analysis of 200 patients. Knee. 2019;26(6):1403-1412. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2019.07.018.
• Moran M, Khan A, Sochart DH, Andrew G. Expect the best, prepare for the worst: Surgeon and patient expectation of the outcome of primary total hip and knee replacement. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2003;85(3):204-206. doi:10.1308/003588403321661415.
• Santaguida PL, Hawker GA, Hudak PL, et al. Patient characteristics affecting the prognosis of total hip and knee joint arthroplasty: A systematic review. Can J Surg. 2008;51(6):428-436.
• Lingard EA, Sledge CB, Learmonth ID. Patient expectations regarding total knee arthroplasty: Differences among the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia. J Bone Jt Surg. 2006;88(6):1201-1207. doi:10.2106/JBJS.E.00147.
• Barlow T, Clark T, Dunbar M, Metcalfe A, Griffin D. The effect of expectation on satisfaction in total knee replacements: A systematic review. Springerplus. 2016;5(1):1-7. doi:10.1186/s40064-016-1804-6.
• Ballantyne PJ, Gignac MAM, Hawker GA. A patient-centered perspective on surgery avoidance for hip or knee arthritis: Lessons for the future. Arthritis Care Res. 2007;57(1):27-34. doi:10.1002/art.22472.
• Riddle DL, Golladay GJ, Hayes A, Ghomrawi HMK. Poor expectations of knee replacement benefit are associated with modifiable psychological factors and influence the decision to have surgery: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study of a community-based sample. Knee. 2017;24(2):354-361. doi:10.1016/j.knee.2016.11.009.
• Bunzli S, Nelson E, Scott A, French S, Choong P, Dowsey M. Barriers and facilitators to orthopaedic surgeons’ uptake of decision aids for total knee arthroplasty: A qualitative study. BMJ Open. 2017;7(11):e018614. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018614.
• Bunzli S, O’Brien P, Klem N, et al. Misconceived expectations: Patient reflections on the total knee replacement journey. Musculoskeletal Care. 2020;18(4):415-424. doi:10.1002/msc.1475.
• Yoo JH, Chang CB, Kang YG, Kim SJ, Seong SC, Kim TK. Patient expectations of total knee replacement and their association with sociodemographic factors and functional status. J Bone Jt Surg - Ser B. 2011;93 B(3):337-344. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.93B3.25168.
• Soroceanu A, Ching A, Abdu W, McGuire K. Relationship between preoperative expectations, satisfaction, and functional outcomes in patients undergoing lumbar and cervical spine surgery: A multicenter study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012;37(2):E103-8. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182245c1f.
• Alberts J, Löwe B, Glahn MA, et al. Development of the generic, multidimensional Treatment Expectation Questionnaire (TEX-Q) through systematic literature review, expert surveys and qualitative interviews. BMJ Open. 2020;10(8): e036169. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2019-036169.
• De Siqueira GP, Dos Santos MBF, Dos Santos JFF, Marchini L. Patients’ expectation and satisfaction with removable dental prosthesis therapy and correlation with patients’ evaluation of the dentists. Acta Odontol Scand. 2013;71(1):210-214. doi:10.3109/00016357.2012.654612.
• Supardi S, Razak SA, Rahmat BSA. Patient’s expectation regarding comprehensive eye examination among young adults. IJAHS. 2021;5(3):2253.
• Becker R, Döring C, Denecke A, Brosz M. Expectation, satisfaction and clinical outcome of patients after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surgery, Sport Traumatol Arthrosc. 2011;19(9):1433-1441. doi:10.1007/s00167-011-1621-y.
• Mancuso CA, Sculco TP, Wickiewicz TL, et al. Patients’ expectations of knee surgery. J Bone Jt Surg. 2001;83(7):1005-1012. doi:10.2106/00004623-200107000-00005.
• Hepinstall MS, Rutledge JR, Bornstein LJ, Mazumdar M, Westrich GH. Factors That impact expectations before total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26(6):870-876. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2010.09.010.
• Jain D, Nguyen LCL, Bendich I, et al. Higher patient expectations predict higher patient-reported outcomes, but not satisfaction, in total knee arthroplasty patients: A prospective multicenter study. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(9):S166-S170. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2017.01.008.
• Koenen P, Bäthis H, Schneider MM, Fröhlich M, Bouillon B, Shafizadeh S. How do we face patients’ expectations in joint arthroplasty? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2014;134(7). doi:10.1007/s00402-014-2012-x.
• Muniesa JM, Marco E, Tejero M, et al. Analysis of the expectations of elderly patients before undergoing total knee replacement. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2010;51(3):83-7. doi:10.1016/j.archger.2010.01.003.
• Conner-Spady BL, Bohm E, Loucks L, Dunbar MJ, Marshall DA, Noseworthy TW. Patient expectations and satisfaction 6 and 12 months following total hip and knee replacement. Qual Life Res. 2020;29(3):705-719. doi:10.1007/s11136-019-02359-7.
• Tolk JJ, Janssen RPA, Haanstra TM, Bierma-Zeinstra SMA, Reijman M. The EKSPECT study: The influence of expectation modification in knee arthroplasty on satisfaction of patients: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2018;19(1):619-626. doi:10.1186/s13063-018-2821-2.
• Process of translation and adaptation of instruments: World Health Organisation. 2018. https://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/. Yayınlanma tarihi: 2018 Erişim Tarihi: 02.08.2021
• Büyüköztürk Ş. Sosyal Bilimler İçin Veri Analizi El Kitabı: İstatistik, Araştırma Deseni SPSS uygulamaları ve Yorum. Ankara: Pegem Akad; 2018.
• Miçooğulları A, Ayberk B, Akbaş U. Hasta beklentilerini yönetme becerisi ölçeğinin geliştirilmesi: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. J Exerc Ther Rehabil. 2017;4(2):76-81.
• Aydınlı A, Taşcı Duran E. Doğum öncesi bakım memnuniyeti ve hasta beklentileri ölçeğinin Türkiye’deki geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması. Ege Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Fakültesi Derg. 2017;33(3):46-61.
• Laferton JAC, Oeltjen L, Neubauer K, Ebert DD, Munder T. The effects of patients' expectations on surgery outcome in total hip and knee arthroplasty: a prognostic factor meta-analysis. Health Psychol Rev. 2022;16(1):50-66.
• Özdamar K. Paket Programlar Ile İstatistiksel Veri Analizi -2 (Çok Değişkenli Analizler): SPSS-MINITAB. Eskişehir: Kaan Kitabevi; 2002.
• Mancuso CA, Graziano S, Briskie LM, et al. Randomized trials to modify patients’ preoperative expectations of hip and knee arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466(2):424-431. doi:10.1007/s11999-007-0052-z.
• Hafkamp FJ, de Vries J, Gosens T, den Oudsten BL. High Pre-operative expectations precede both unfulfilled expectations and clinical improvement after total hip and total knee replacement. J Arthroplasty. 2020;35(7):1806-1812. doi:10.1016/j.arth.2020.02.061.
• Ghomrawi HMK, Lee L, Nwachukwu BU, et al. Preoperative expectations associated with postoperative dissatisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: A cohort study. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2020;28(4):E145-E150. doi:10.5435/JAAOS-D-18-00785.
• Van Den Akker-Scheek I, Van Raay JJ, Reininga IH, Bulstra SK, Zijlstra W, Stevens M. Reliability and concurrent validity of the Dutch hip and knee replacement expectations surveys. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2010;11(1):1-8. doi:10.1186/1471-2474-11-242.
• Neuprez A, Delcour JP, Fatemi F, et al. Development and validation of the French version of a tool assessing patient’s expectations in lower limb osteoarthritis. J Orthop. 2015;12(1):46-57. doi:10.1016/j.jor.2014.06.002.
• Wang C, Zhang C, Liu DL, et al. Simplified Chinese version of hip and knee replacement expectations surveys in patients with osteoarthritis and ankylosing spondylitis: Cross-cultural adaptation, validation and reliability. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018;19(1):247-57. doi:10.1186/s12891-018-2129-0.
• Stahmer SA, Shofer FS, Marino A, Shepherd S, Abbuhl S. Do quantitative changes in pain intensity correlate with pain relief and satisfaction? Acad Emerg Med. 1998;5(9):851-857. doi:10.1111/j.1553-2712.1998.tb02811.x.
• Müller-Staub M, Meer R, Briner G, Probst MT, Needham I. Measuring patient satisfaction in an emergency unit of a Swiss university hospital: occurrence of anxiety, insecurity, worry, pain, dyspnoea, nausea, thirst and hunger, and their correlation with patient satisfaction (part 2). Pflege. 2008;21(3):180-188. doi:10.1024/1012-5302.21.3.180.