Übersetzung und psychometrische Austestung des Western-Ontario-Rotator-Cuff-Index (WORC) für den Gebrauch in deutscher Sprache

 

 Buy Article Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Studienziel: Zur Bewertung der Lebensqualität von Patienten mit Erkrankungen der Rotatorenmanschette steht derzeit kein spezifisches patientenorientiertes Messinstrument in deutscher Sprache zur Verfügung. Ziel der Arbeit ist die deutsche Übersetzung und psychometrische Austestung des 21 Items umfassenden, multidimensionalen Western-Ontario-Rotator-Cuff-Index (WORC) nach internationalen Richtlinien. Methode: Nach Übersetzung und Cross-Culture-Adaptation des englischen Originals wurden die Reliabilität, die Validität, die Praktikabilität und die Akzeptanz der deutschen Version des WORC an 102 Patienten mit einer Impingementsymptomatik geprüft. Weiters wurden der SF-36, der Constant- und der UCLA-Score an allen Patienten erhoben. Resultate: Der Pearson-Korrelationskoeffizient zeigte mit r = 0,96 ein exzellentes Resultat für die Test-Retest-Reliabilität. Die interne Konsistenz erbrachte mit einem Cronbach-Alpha-Koeffizienten von 0,96 eine hohe Homogenität. Der Pearson-Korrelations-Koeffizient wies mit Werten von 0,66-0,81 eine hohe Korrelation mit den physischen Subskalen des SF-36, dem Constant- und dem UCLA-Score auf. Die durchschnittliche Zeit zur Beantwortung des WORC lag bei 7,5 Minuten, zur Auswertung bei 10 Minuten. Die Akzeptanz und Verständlichkeit waren sehr gut. Schlussfolgerung: Nach erfolgreicher Übersetzung und psychometrischer Austestung der deutschen Version des Western-Ontario-Rotator-Cuff-Index (WORC) steht ein patientenorientiertes Messinstrument zur Beurteilung deutschsprachiger Patienten mit pathologischen Veränderungen der Rotatorenmanschette zur Verfügung.

Abstract

Aim: At the moment a specific subjective measurement tool for evaluation of German-speaking patients with a pathology of the rotator cuff is lacking. Following international guidelines, the German translation and the psychometric testing of the 21-item, multidimensional Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) is the aim of the study. Method: After translation and cross-culture adaptation of the English original, the reliability, validity, practicability and the acceptance of the German version of the WORC were tested on 102 patients with an impingement syndrome. Additionally the SF-36, the Constant and UCLA score were evaluated. Results: The Pearson correlation coefficient showed with 0.96 an excellent result for the test-retest reliability. The internal consistency showed a high homogeneity with a Cronbach alpha coefficient of 0.96. A Pearson correlation coefficient between 0.66-0.81 registered a high correlation with the physical subscales of the SF-36, the Constant and the UCLA score. The mean time required for filling out the WORC was 7.5 minutes, the mean time required for evaluation was 10 minutes. The acceptance and the understanding were very high. Conclusion: After successful translation and psychometric testing of the German version of the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC), a patient-based measurement tool for evaluating the quality of life of German-speaking patients with pathology of the rotator cuff is available.

Literatur

• 1 Najman J M, Levine S. Evaluating the impact of medical care and technology on the quality of life: a review and critique.  Soc Sci Med. 1981;  15F 107-115
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 2 Streiner D L, Norman G R. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford University Press, New York 1991
  Google Scholar
• 3 Lingard E, Hashimoto H, Sledge C. Development of outcome research for total hip arthroplasty.  J Orthop Sci. 2000;  5 175-177
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 4 Hunt S M, McEwen J. The development of a subjective health indicator.  Sociol Health Illn. 1980;  2 231-246
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 5 Lea R D, Gerhardt J J. Current concepts review. Range of motion measurements.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1995;  77 784-798
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 6 Beaton D E, Schemitsch E. Measures of health-related quality of life and physical function.  Clin Orthop. 2003;  413 90-105
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 7 Kirkley A, Alvarez C, Griffin S. The development and evaluation of a disease-specific quality-of-life questionnaire for disorders of the rotator cuff: The Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index.  Clin J Sport Med. 2003;  13 84-92
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 8 Acquadro C, Jambon B, Ellis D, Marquis P. Language and translation issues. In: Spilker B (ed). Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. Second Edition. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia 1996; 575-585
  Google Scholar
• 9 Anderson R T, MacFarlane M, Naughton M J, Shumaker S A. Conceptual issues and considerations in cross-cultural validation of generic health-related quality of life instruments. In: Spiker B (ed). Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. Second edition, Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia 1996; 605-612
  Google Scholar
• 10 Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross culture adaptation of health related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines.  J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;  46 1417-1432
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 11 Wiesinger G F, Nuhr M, Quittan M, Ebenbichler G, Wolfl G, Fialka-Moser V. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Roland-Morris questionnaire for German-speaking patients with low back pain.  Spine. 1999;  24 1099-1103
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 12 Constant C R, Murley A HG. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder.  Clin Orthop. 1987;  214 160-164
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 13 Ellman H, Hanker G, Bayer M. Repair of the rotator cuff: end-result study of factors influencing reconstruction.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1986;  68 1136-1144
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 14 Bullinger M. German translation and psychometric testing of the SF-36 health survey: preliminary results from the IQOLA Project.  Soc Sci Med. 1995;  41 1359-1366
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 15 Portney L G, Watkins M P. Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall, New Jork 2000
  Google Scholar
• 16 Nunnally J C, Bernstein I CH. Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New York 1994
  Google Scholar
• 17 Cronbach L J. Coefficient alpha and internal structure of tests.  Psychometrika. 1951;  16 297-334
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 18 Bergenudd H, Lindgärde F, Nilsson B, Petersson C J. Shoulder pain in middle age. A study of prevalence and relation to occupational work load and psychosocial factors.  Clin Orthop. 1988;  231 234-238
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 19 Chakravarty K K, Webley M. Shoulder joint movement and its relationship to disability in the elderly.  J Rheumatol. 1993;  20 1359-1361
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 20 Offenbaecher M, Ewert T, Sangha O, Stucki G. Validation of a German version of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH-G).  J Rheumatol. 2002;  29 401-402
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 21 Beaton D E, Katz J N, Fossel A H, Wright J G, Tarasuk V, Bombardier C. Measuring the whole or the parts? Validity, realibility and responsiveness of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand outcome measure in different regions of the upper extremity.  J Hand Ther. 2001;  14 128-146
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 22 Kirkley A, Griffith S, McLintock H, Ng L. The development and evaluation of a disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for shoulder instability: The western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI).  Am J Sports Med. 1998;  26 764-772
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 23 Kirkley A, Griffin S, Dainty K. Scoring systems for the functional assessment of the shoulder.  Arthroscopy. 2003;  19 1109-1120
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 24 MacDermid J C, Richards R S, Donner A, Bellamy N, Roth J H. Responsiveness of the SF-36, DASH, patient-rated wrist evaluation and physical impairments in evaluating recovery after a distal radius fracture.  J Hand Surg [Am]. 2000;  25 330-340
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 25 Gartland J J. Orthopaedic clinical research. Deficiencies in experimental design and determinations of outcome.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1988;  70 1357-1364
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 26 Othman A, Taylor G. Is the Constant score reliable in assessing patients with frozen shoulder?.  Acta Orthop Scand. 2004;  75 114-116
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 27 Patel V R, Singh D, Calvert P T, Bayley J IL. Arthroscopic subacromial decompression: results and factors affecting outcome.  J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999;  8 231-237
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 28 Conboy B C, Morris R W, Kiss J, Carr A J. An evaluation of the Constant-Murley shoulder assessment.  J Bone Joint Surg [Br]. 1996;  78 229-232
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 29 Ware J E. SF-36 Healthy survey update.  Spine. 2000;  25 3130-3139
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 30 Brühlmann P, Stucki G, Michel B A. Evaluation of a German version of the physical dimensions of the Health Assessment Questionnaire in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.  J Rheumatol. 1994;  21 245-1249
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 31 Dunbar M J, Robertsson O, Ryd L, Lidgren L. Translation and validation of the Oxford-12 item Knee Score for use in Sweden.  Acta Orthop Scand. 2000;  71 268-274
  CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
• 32 Kessler S, Pfänder T, Nelitz M, Puhl W, Günther K P. Pediatric Musculoskeletal Functional Health Questionnaire. Ein Funktionsfragebogen zur Erfassung von Erkrankungen des Stütz- und Bewegungsapparates bei Kindern und Jugendlichen - erste Ergebnisse der Validierung einer deutschen Version.  Z Orthop. 2001;  139 134-137
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 33 Pose B, Sangha O, Peters A, Wildner M. Validierung des North American Spine Society Instrumentes zur Erfassung des Gesundheitsstatus bei Patienten mit chronischen Rückenbeschwerden.  Z Orthop. 1999;  137 437-441
  PubMedGoogle Scholar
• 34 Beaton D E, Richards R R. Measuring function of the shoulder.  J Bone Joint Surg [Am]. 1996;  78 882-890
  PubMedGoogle Scholar

Dr. med. W. Huber

Friedrich-Schiller-Str. 45

2340 Mödling

Österreich

Phone: +43/6 76/5 05 47 48

Email: w.huber@univie.ac.at