Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain

Öke, Deniz; Çiftçi, Betül; UZUNKULAOĞLU, ASLIHAN

doi:10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068

Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain

Betül ÇİFTÇİ, (Kırklareli Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Yüksekokulu, Fizik Tedavi ve Rehabilitasyon Anabilim Dalı, Kırklareli, Türkiye)

Aslıhan UZUNKULAOĞLU, (Ufuk Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Fiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)

Deniz ÖKE TOPÇU (İstanbul Gaziosmanpaşa Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Fiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon Anabilim Dalı, İstanbul, Türkiye)

Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica

14 0

Yıl: 2021 Cilt: 55 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 208 - 212 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068 İndeks Tarihi: 29-09-2021

Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain

Öz:

Objectives: The aim of this study was to translate The Self-Reported Foot and Ankle Score (SEFAS) into Turkish and to determinethe validity and reliability of the translated version in patients shoulder pain.Material and Methods: The Turkish version of the Shoulder Rating Questionnaire (SRQ-T) was applied to patients aftertranslation from English into Turkish. Patients with various shoulder pain complaint were included into the study if theywere over 18 years. The patients with mixed-type pain, cancer pain, headache, substance abuse, severe depression, andfibromyalgia syndrome were excluded. The musculoskeletal and neurological examinations of the patients were performed.The Turkish version of the Shoulder Rating Questionnaire (SRQ-T) and Disabilities of arm, shoulder, hands-T (DASH-T) wereapplied to all patients.Results: 122 patients were included in the study, and then patients are divided into two groups: Group 1, working group (n = 72);Group 2, non- working group (n = 50). The reliability and consistency of SRQ-T for all the samples were acceptable with aCronbach’s coefficient of 0.979. The test-retest method was used to determine reliability of the scale. Cronbach’s alpha wasmeasured pre-assessment and post- assessment; the values were 0.815 and 0.770, respectively. The correlation analysis wasdetermined for all the samples and calculated as 0.780. Also, the test-retest method with Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test was used todetermine reliability of the SRQ- T and its domains in group 1 and group 2.Conclusion: The Turkish version of the SRQ-T seems to be a valid and reliable self-administered questionnaire to evaluate theshoulder pain in Turkish patients.Level of Evidence: Level II, Diagnostic Study

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Bibliyografik

1. Urwin M, Symmons D, Allison T, et al. Estimating the burden of musculoskeletal disorders in the community: The comparative prevalence of symptoms at different anatomical sites, and the relation to social deprivation. Ann Rheum Dis. 1998;57(11):649-655. 10.1136/ard.57.11.649
2. Luime JJ, Koes BW, Hendriksen IJ, et al. Prevalence and incidence of shoulder pain in the general population; a systematic review. Scand J Rheumatol. 2004;33(2):73-81. 10.1080/03009740310004667
3. Linsell L, Dawson J, Zondervan K, et al. Prevalence and incidence of adults consulting for shoulder conditions in UK primary care; patterns of diagnosis and referral. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45(2):215-221. 10.1093/rheumatol ogy/kei139
4. Bergman S, Herrström P, Högström K, Petersson IF, Svensson B, Jacobsson LT. Chronic musculoskeletal pain, prevalence rates, and sociodemographic associations in a Swedish population study. J Rheumatol. 2001;28(6):1369-1377.
5. Greenberg DL. Evaluation and treatment of shoulder pain. Med Clin North Am. 2014;98(3):487-504. 10.1016/j.mcna.2014.01.016
6. Michener LA, Walsworth MK, Burnet EN. Effectiveness of rehabilitation for patients with subacromial impingement syndrome: A systematic review. J Hand Ther. 2004;17(2):152-164. 10.1197/j.jht.2004.02.004
7. van der Windt DA, Koes BW, de Jong BA, Bouter LM. Shoulder disorders in general practice: Incidence, patient characteristics, and management. Ann Rheum Dis. 1995;54(12):959-964. 10.1136/ard.54.12.959
8. Gebremariam L, Hay EM, van der Sande R, Rinkel WD, Koes BW, Huisstede BM. Subacromial impingement syndrome—effectiveness of physiotherapy and manual therapy. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(16):1202-1208. 10.1136/bjsports2012-091802
9. Holmes RE, Barfield WR, Woolf SK. Clinical evaluation of nonarthritic shoulder pain: Diagnosis and treatment. Phys Sportsmed. 2015;43(3):262-268. 10.1080/00913847.2015.1005542
10. Richards RR, An KN, Bigliani LU, et al. A standardized method for the assessment of shoulder function. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1994;3(6):347-352. 10.1016/ S1058-2746(09)80019-0.
11. 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) [published correction appears in Am J Ind Med 1996 Sep;30(3):372]. Am J Ind Med. 1996;29(6):602-608. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0274(199606)29:6%3C;602::AIDAJIM4%3E;3.0.CO;2-L
12. Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987;(214):160-164. Jan. PMID: 3791738.
13. Roach KE, Budiman-Mak E, Songsiridej N, Lertratanakul Y. Development of a shoulder pain and disability index. Arthritis Care Res. 1991;4(4):143-149. 10. 1002/art.1790040403
14. Lippitt SB, Harryman DT, Matsen FA. A practical tool for evaluation of function: the Simple Shoulder Test. In: Matsen FA, Fu FH, Hawkins RJ , editors. The shoulder: A balance of mobility and stability. Rosemont. IL: American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons; 1993. 545-559.
15. Dawson J, Rogers K, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A. The Oxford Shoulder Score revisited. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2009;129(1):119-123. 10.1007/s00402-007-0549-7
16. Kirkley A, Griffin 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 (6):764-772. 10.1177/03635465980260060501
17. Lo IK, Griffin S, Kirkley A. The development of a disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: The Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2001;9 (8):771-778. 10.1053/joca.2001.0474
18. 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(2):84-92. 10. 1097/00042752-200303000-00004
19. Vermeulen HM, Boonman DC, Schüller HM, et al. Translation, adaptation and validation of the Shoulder Rating Questionnaire (SRQ) into the Dutch language. Clin Rehabil. 2005;19(3):300-311. 10.1191/0269215505cr811oa.
20. Celik D, Atalar AC, Demirhan M, Dirican A. Translation, cultural adaptation, validity and reliability of the Turkish ASES questionnaire. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(9):2184-2189. 10.1007/s00167-012-2183-3
21. Hazar Kanik Z, Gunaydin G, Pala OO, et al. Translation, cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the Turkish version of the Penn Shoulder Score. Disabil Rehabil. 2018;40(10):1214-1219. 10.1080/09638288.2017.1284905.
22. Beaton DE, Schemitsch E. Measures of health-related quality of life and physical function. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003(413):90-105. 10.1097/01.blo. 0000079772.06654.c8.
23. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78-B(4):593-600. 10.1302/ 0301-620X.78B4.0780593
24. Hsu JE, Russ SM, Somerson JS, Tang A, Warme WJ, Matsen FA3rd. Is the Simple Shoulder Test a valid outcome instrument for shoulder arthroplasty? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2017;26(10):1693-1700. 10.1016/j.jse.2017. 03.029
25. Paul A, Lewis M, Shadforth MF, Croft PR, Van Der Windt DA, Hay EM. A comparison of four shoulder-specific questionnaires in primary care. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(10):1293-1299. 10.1136/ard.2003.012088
26. L’Insalata JC, Warren RF, Cohen SB, Altchek DW, Peterson MG. A self-administered questionnaire for assessment of symptoms and function of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79(5):738-748. 10.2106/00004623- 199705000-00014
27. de Siqueira DC, Baptista AF, Souza I, Sá KN. Tradução, adaptação cultural, validade e confiabilidade do questionário de classificação do ombro para uso no Brasil [Translation, cultural adaptation, validity and reliability of the shoulder rating questionnaire for use in Brazil]. Rev Bras Reumatol. 2014;54 (6):415-423. 10.1016/j.rbr.2014.04.006
28. Choi Y, Park JW, Noh S, Kim MS, Park YH, Sung DH. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Korean version of the Shoulder Disability Questionnaire and Shoulder Rating Questionnaire. Ann Rehabil Med. 2015;39(5):705-717. 10. 5535/arm.2015.39.5.705
29. 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. 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
30. Kennedy CA, Beaton DE, Solway S, McConell S, Bombardier C. The DASH and QuickDASH outcome measure user’s manual. 3rd edn Toronto, Institute for Work & Health; 2011.
31. Düger T, Yakut E, Ç Ö, et al. Kol omuz ve el sorunları (disabilities of arm, shoulder and hand) anketi Türkçe uyarlamasının güvenirliği ve geçerliliği. Türk Fizyoterapi ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi. 2006;17:99-107.https://scholar.goo gle.com/scholar_lookup?journal=Fizyoterapi+Rehabilitasyon%itle=Reliability +and+validity+of+the+Turkish+version+of+the+Disabilities+of+the+Arm, +Shoulder+and+Hand+(DASH)+Questionnaire%volume=17%publication_ year=2006%pages=99%
32. Angst F, Schwyzer HK, Aeschlimann A, Simmen BR, Goldhahn J. Measures of adult shoulder function: Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH) and its short version (QuickDASH), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Society standardized shoulder assessment form, Constant (Murley) Score (CS), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Shoulder Disability Questionnaire (SDQ), and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63(Suppl 11):S174-88. 10. 1002/acr.20630
33. Eechaute C, Vaes P, Van Aerschot L, Asman S, Duquet W. The clinimetric qualities of patient-assessed instruments for measuring chronic ankle instability: A systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2007;8:6. 10.1186/1471-2474-8-6
34. Nørholm V, Bech P The WHO Quality of Life (WHOQOL) Questionnaire: Danish validation study. Nord J Psychiatry. 2001;55(4):229-235. 10.1080/ 080394801681019075

APA	Çiftçi B, UZUNKULAOĞLU A, Öke D (2021). Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain. , 208 - 212. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
Chicago	Çiftçi Betül,UZUNKULAOĞLU ASLIHAN,Öke Deniz Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain. (2021): 208 - 212. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
MLA	Çiftçi Betül,UZUNKULAOĞLU ASLIHAN,Öke Deniz Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain. , 2021, ss.208 - 212. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
AMA	Çiftçi B,UZUNKULAOĞLU A,Öke D Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain. . 2021; 208 - 212. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
Vancouver	Çiftçi B,UZUNKULAOĞLU A,Öke D Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain. . 2021; 208 - 212. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
IEEE	Çiftçi B,UZUNKULAOĞLU A,Öke D "Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain." , ss.208 - 212, 2021. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
ISNAD	Çiftçi, Betül vd. "Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain". (2021), 208-212. https://doi.org/10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068

APA	Çiftçi B, UZUNKULAOĞLU A, Öke D (2021). Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, 55(3), 208 - 212. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
Chicago	Çiftçi Betül,UZUNKULAOĞLU ASLIHAN,Öke Deniz Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica 55, no.3 (2021): 208 - 212. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
MLA	Çiftçi Betül,UZUNKULAOĞLU ASLIHAN,Öke Deniz Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, vol.55, no.3, 2021, ss.208 - 212. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
AMA	Çiftçi B,UZUNKULAOĞLU A,Öke D Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica. 2021; 55(3): 208 - 212. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
Vancouver	Çiftçi B,UZUNKULAOĞLU A,Öke D Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica. 2021; 55(3): 208 - 212. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
IEEE	Çiftçi B,UZUNKULAOĞLU A,Öke D "Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain." Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, 55, ss.208 - 212, 2021. 10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068
ISNAD	Çiftçi, Betül vd. "Validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the shoulder rating questionnaire in patients with shoulder pain". Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica 55/3 (2021), 208-212. https://doi.org/10.5152/j.aott.2021.19068