International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33)’un Türkçe Versiyonun Kültürel Arası Adaptasyon, Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması:Pilot Çalışma

Yıl 2023, , 61 - 68, 25.08.2023

Emre Altındağ , Gökhan Maraş , Selda Başar , Seyit Çıtaker

https://doi.org/10.52881/gsbdergi.1293279

Öz

Anketler hastalığın hikayesinde, fizik muayenede ve görüntüleme araçlarına bağlı olarak kalça patolojilerinin teşhisinde önemli rol oynamaktadırlar. Kalça patolojileri için farklı anketler vardır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33)’un Türkçe versiyonuna uyarlama, geçerlik ve güvenirliğini araştırmaktır. iHOT-33’ün Türkçe’ye çevirisi ve kültürel uygunluğu mevcut yönergeler izlenerek yapılmıştır. Bu çalışmaya düşük yaş ortalamasına ve yüksek fiziksel kapasiteye sahip 50 hasta katıldı. Ölçeğin güvenirliğini değerlendirmek için test-tekrar test ve iç tutarlık analizleri uygulandı. Test tekrar test analizi, sınıf içi korelasyon katsayısı (ICC) yöntemi ile analiz edildi. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Short Form 36 (SF-36) anketlerinin toplam puanları, iHOT-33’ün geçerliğini belirlemek için Pearson korelasyonu ile değerlendirildi. iHOT-33’ün yüksek düzeyde iç tutarlılığa sahip olduğu bulundu (Cronbach alfa 0.908). Test-tekrar test sonuçları yüksek korelasyon gösterdi (0.702-0.938 aralığında). Faktör analizi, ölçeğin dört faktörlü bir yapıya sahip olduğunu gösterdi. iHOT-33, WOMAC ve SF-36 ile iyi düzeyde korelasyona sahiptir (Pearson korelasyon katsayısı WOMAC ile -0.710, SF-36 ile -0.594). iHOT-33’ün Türkçe versiyonu geçerli ve güvenilirdir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

kalça, sonuç değerlendirme, patoloji, sonuçların geçerliği

Cross-Cultural Adaptation, Validity, and Reliability Study of Turkish Version of the International Hip Outcome Tool-33 (iHOT-33): A Pilot Study

Öz

Questionnaries play a key role for diagnosing hip pathologies depending on the history of the disorder, physical examination and imaging tools. There are different questionnaries for hip pathologies. The purpose of this study is to investigate adaptation, validity, and reliability of the Turkish version of the International Hip Outcome Tool-33 (iHOT-33). Translation of iHOT-33 into Turkish and its cultural suitability were performed by following existing guidelines. Fifty patients with hip joint pathology with low mean age and high physical capacity participated in this study. Test-retest and internal consistency analyzes were applied to evaluate the reliability of the scale. Test-retest analysis was analyzed by the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) method. The total scores of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and Short Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaires were evaluated with the Pearson correlation to determine the validity of iHOT-33. iHOT-33 was found to have a high level of internal consistency (Cronbach alpha value 0.908). Test-retest results showed high correlation (range 0.702 to 0.938). Factor analysis showed that the scale had a four-factor structure. iHOT-33 has good level correlation with WOMAC and SF-36 (Pearson correlation coefficient -0.710 with WOMAC and -0.594 with SF-36).
Conclusion: The Turkish version of the iHOT-33 is valid and reliable.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Hip, outcome evaluation, pathologies

Kaynakça

• 1. Osteoartriti K. Genç Erişkinlerde Kalça Ağrısına Yaklaşım (Femoroasetabuler Sıkışma ve. Turkiye Klinikleri J Orthop & Traumatol-Special Topics. 2015;8(1):25-9.
• 2. Annabell L, Master V, Rhodes A, Moreira B, Coetzee C, Tran P. Hip pathology: the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research. 2018;13(1):1-5.
• 3. Frank JS, Gambacorta PL, Eisner EA. Hip pathology in the adolescent athlete. JAAOS-Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. 2013;21(11):665- 74.
• 4. Bredella MA, Ulbrich EJ, Stoller DW, Anderson SE. Femoroacetabular impingement. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics. 2013;21(1):45-64.
• 5. Polat G, Şahin K, Arzu U, Kendirci AŞ, Aşık M. Prevalence of asymptomatic femoroacetabular impingement in Turkey; cross sectional study. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica. 2018;52(1):49-53.
• 6. Özge İ, Bayar K, Bayar B. Turkish version of International Hip Outcome Tool (IHOT12T): validity and reliability study. Journal of Exercise Therapy and Rehabilitation. 2019;6(3):211-9.
• 7. Nilsdotter A, Bremander A. Measures of hip function and symptoms: Harris hip score (HHS), hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS), Oxford hip score (OHS), Lequesne index of severity for osteoarthritis of the hip (LISOH), and American Academy of orthopedic surgeons (AAOS) hip and knee questionnaire. Arthritis Care & Research. 2011;63(S11):S200-S7.
• 8. Mohtadi NG, Griffin DR, Pedersen ME, Chan D, Safran MR, Parsons N, Sekiya JK, Kelly BT, Werle JR, Leunig M. The development and validation of a self- administered quality-of-life outcome measure for young, active patients with symptomatic hip disease: the International Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-33). Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2012;28(5):595-610. e1.
• 9. Dion M-O, Faure P-A, May O, Bonin N, Beaulé P, Carsen S, Nault M-L, Pelet S, Simonyan D, Belzile EL. Validation of the French version of the self-administered international hip outcome tool-33 questionnaire. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research. 2021;107(3):102858.
• 10. Li D, Wang W, Li X, Gao Y, Liu D, Liu D, Xu W. Development of a valid simplified Chinese version of the International Hip Outcome Tool (SC- iHOT-33) in young patients having total hip arthroplasty. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage. 2017;25(1):94-8.
• 11. Ruiz-Ibán MA, Seijas R, Sallent A, Ares O, Marín-Peña O, Muriel A, Cuéllar R. The international Hip Outcome Tool-33 (iHOT-33): multicenter validation and translation to Spanish. Health and quality of life outcomes. 2015;13:1-7.
• 12. Baumann F, Weber J, Zeman F, Müller M, Lahner M, Nerlich M, Fickert S. Validation of a German version of the International Hip Outcome Tool (G- iHOT33) according to the COSMIN checklist: how much improvement is clinically relevant? Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery. 2016;136(1):83-91.
• 13. Polesello GC, Godoy GF, Trindade CAdC, Queiroz MCd, Honda E, Ono NK. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Modified Hip Outcome Tool (Mhot) into Portuguese. Acta Ortopedica Brasileira. 2012;20:88-92.
• 14. Tijssen M, Tak I, Stubbe J, Haverkamp D, De Visser E, Nijhuis-Van der Sanden M, Van Cingel R. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the Dutch international hip outcome Tool- 33 (iHOT-33 nl) in young, physically active individuals with symptomatic hip joint pathology. journal of orthopaedic & sports physical therapy. 2018;48(4):289-98.
• 15. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, Erikson P. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value in health. 2005;8(2):94-104.
• 16. 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- 91.
• 17. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. The Journal of rheumatology. 1988;15(12):1833-40.
• 18. Tüzün EH, Eker L, Aytar A, Daşkapan A, Bayramoğlu M. Acceptability,67Gazi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 2023: 8(2): 61-68.Altındağ ve ark. reliability, validity and responsiveness of the Turkish version of WOMAC osteoarthritis index. Osteoarthritis and cartilage. 2005;13(1):28-33.
• 19. Kocyigit H, Aydemir O, Fisek G, Olmez N, Memis A. Validity and reliability of Turkish version of Short form 36: A study of a patients with romatoid disorder. J Drug Ther. 1999;12(2):102-6.
• 20. Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research. 2005;19(1):231-40.
• 21. Zinbarg RE, Yovel I, Revelle W, McDonald RP. Estimating generalizability to a latent variable common to all of a scale's indicators: A comparison of estimators for ωh. Applied Psychological Measurement. 2006;30(2):121-44.
• 22. Martin DP, Engelberg R, Agel J, Swiontkowski MF. Comparison of the musculoskeletal function assessment questionnaire with the short form-36, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, and the Sickness Impact Profile health-status measures. JBJS. 1997;79(9):1323-35.
• 23. Dunn OJ, Clark VA. Basic statistics: a primer for the biomedical sciences: John Wiley & Sons. 2009.
• 24. Stevens M, Van den Akker-Scheek I, Ten Have B, Adema M, Giezen H, Reininga IH. Validity and reliability of the Dutch version of the international hip outcome tool (iHOT-12NL) in patients with disorders of the hip. journal of orthopaedic & sports physical therapy. 2015;45(12):1026-34.