Top

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2020 | Research

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Slovenian version of Harris Hip Score

Authors: Petra Josipović, Metka Moharič, Dea Salamon

Published in: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes | Issue 1/2020

Abstract

Introduction

The Harris Hip Score is the most widely used outcome measure for the assessment of hip pathologies. An official Slovenian version has not been culturally adapted and validated. The aim of this study was to create a Slovenian valid and reliable version of the HHS.

Materials and method

The HHS was translated and modified in Slovenian. The measurement properties of the Slovenian HHS were tested in 42 patients suffering from different hip pathologies. Reliability, responsiveness, construct validity, convergent/divergent validity and content validity of the Slovenian version of the HHS were tested.

Results

Only minor adaptation was required in the translation process. The internal consistency of the HHS expressed by Cronbach’s alpha was 0.94. The test–retest reliability expressed by the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.983. The correlations of the HHS scale with the WOMAC scale (r = − 0.877) and the VAS scale (r = − 0.717) were statistically significant. The highest correlation between the HHS and SF-36 was with the General Health dimension (r = 0.61). while the lowest correlation was with the SF-36 Mental Health dimension (r = 0.43). MDC95% was 10.1. No floor or ceiling effects were found.

Conclusion

Slovenian version of HHS seems to has an acceptable level of reliability and validity. Slovenian HHS is short, comprehensible and easy to administer and interpret.

Trial registration

Approved by the Slovenian National Medical Ethics Committee (0120-46/2019/19).

Available only for authorised users

Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51(4):737–55.PubMedCrossRef

Klässbo M, Larsson E, Mannevik E. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score. An extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol. 2003;32(1):46–51.PubMedCrossRef

Christensen CP, Althausen PL, Mittleman MA, Lee JA, McCarthy JC. The nonarthritic hip score: reliable and validated. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;406:75–83.CrossRef

Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78(2):185–90.PubMedCrossRef

Thorborg K, Hölmich P, Christensen R, Petersen J, Roos EM. The Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS): development and validation according to the COSMIN checklist. Br J Sports Med. 2011;45(6):478–91.PubMedCrossRef

Garellick G, Malchau H, Herberts P. Specific or general health outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip replacement: a comparison between the Harris Hip Score and the Nottingham Health Profile. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80:600–6.PubMedCrossRef

Lieberman JR, Dorey F, Shekelle P, Schumacher L, Kilgus DJ, Thomas BJ, et al. Outcome after total hip arthroplasty: comparison of a traditional disease-specific and a quality-of-life measurement of outcome. J Arthroplasty. 1997;12:639–45.PubMedCrossRef

Soderman P, Malchau H, Herberts P. Outcome of total hip replacement: a comparison of different measurement methods. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;390:163–72.CrossRef

Frihagen F, Grotle M, Madsen JE, Wyller TB, Mowinckel P, Nordsletten L. Outcome after femoral neck fractures: a comparison of Harris Hip Score, Eq-5d and Barthel Index. Injury. 2008;39:1147–56.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Hoeksma HL, van den Ende CH, Ronday HK, Heering A, Breedveld FC. Comparison of the responsiveness of the Harris Hip Score with generic measures for hip function in osteoarthritis of the hip. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62:935–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

11.

Malchau H, Soderman P, Herberts P. The validity and reliability of Harris Hip Score. In: SICOT. SICOT, Sydney, 1999.

12.

Mahomed NN, et al. The Harris hip score: comparison of patient self-report with surgeon assessment. J Bone Joint Surg. 2001;16(5):575–80.

13.

Mahomed NN, Katz JN, Liang MH, et al: The role of patient expectations in predicting functional outcomes and satisfaction with total hip and knee arthroplasty. In: Canadian Orthopaedic Association annual meeting, Ottawa, Canada, 1998.

14.

Lieberman J, Dorey F, Shekelle P, et al. Differences between patients’ and physicians’ evaluations of outcome after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg. 1996;78:835.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Dettoni F, Pellegrino P, La Russa MR, Bonasia DE, Blonna D, Bruzzone M, Castoldi F, Rossi R. Validation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Italian version of the Harris Hip Score. Hip Int. 2015;25(1):91–7.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Çelik D, Can C, Aslan Y, Ceylan HH, Bilsel K, Ozdincler AR. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation of the Turkish version of the Harris Hip Score. Hip Int. 2014;24(5):473–9.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Khaja A et al. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Harris Hip Score into Arabic. Doi: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.2.23408/v1.

18.

Guimarães RP, Alves DPL, Silva GB, Bittar ST, Ono NK, Honda E. Tradução e adaptação transcultural do instrumento de avaliação do quadril “Harris Hip Score.” Acta Ortop Bras. 2010;18(3):142–7.CrossRef

19.

Söderman P, Malchau H. Is the Harris Hip Score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;384:189–97.CrossRef

20.

Lopez AD, Ciconelli RM, Reis FB. Medidas de avaliação de qualidade de vida e estados de saúde em ortopedia. Rev Bras Ortop. 2007;42:355–9.CrossRef

21.

Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46(12):1417–32.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral and biomedical sciences. Behav Res Methods. 2007;39(2):175–91. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146.CrossRef

23.

Bellamy N, Buchanan W, 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 OA of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988;15:1833–40.PubMed

24.

Marn-Vukadinovic D, Jamnik H. Validation of the short form-36 health survey supported with isokinetic strength testing after sport knee injury. J Sport Rehabil. 2011;20(3):261–76.PubMedCrossRef

25.

Alghadir AH, Anwer S, Iqbal A, Iqbal ZA. Test–retest reliability, validity, and minimum detectable change of visual analog, numerical rating, and verbal rating scales for measurement of osteoarthritic knee pain. J Pain Res. 2018;11:851.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef

26.

Kalairajah Y, Azurza K, Hulme C, Molloy S, Drabu KJ. Health outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip arthroplasties: a comparison between the Harris hip score and the Oxford hip score. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:1037–41.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Stucki G, Meier D, Stucki S, Michel BA, Tyndall AG, Dick W, Theiler R. Evaluation of a German version of WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) Arthrosis Index. Z Rheumatol. 1996;55:40–9.PubMed

28.

Laucis NC, Hays RD, Bhattacharyya T. Scoring the SF-36 in orthopaedics: a brief guide. J Bone Joint Surg. 2015;97(19):1628.PubMedCrossRef

29.

Lins L, Carvalho FM. SF-36 total score as a single measure of health-related quality of life: scoping review. SAGE Open Med. 2016;30(4):2050312116671725.

30.

Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.PubMedCrossRef

31.

Polit DF. Assessing measurement in health: Beyond reliability and validity. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015;52(11):1746–53.PubMedCrossRef

32.

Atkinson G, Nevill AM. Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. Sports Med. 1998;26(4):217–38.PubMedCrossRef

33.

Irrgang JJ, Marx RG. Clinical outcomes in sport and exercise physical therapies. In: Kolt GS, Synder-Mackler L, editors. Physical therapies in sports and exercise. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2007. p. 206–19.

34.

George D. SPSS for windows step by step: A simple study guide and reference, 17.0 update, 10/e. Pearson Education India; 2011.

35.

Bland J, Altman M, Douglas G. Statistics notes: Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ. 1997;314:7080–572.

36.

Hinman RS, Dobson F, Takla A, O’Donnell J, Bennell KL. Which is the most useful patient-reported outcome in femoroacetabular impingement? Test-retest reliability of six questionnaires. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48(6):458–63.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Marx RG, Menzes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF. A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiolog. 2003;56(8):730–5.CrossRef

38.

Shi HY, Mau LW, Chang JK, Wang JW, Chiu HC. Responsiveness of the Harris Hip Score and the SF-36: five years after total hip arthroplasty. Qual Life Res. 2009;18:1053–60.PubMedCrossRef

39.

Ferris LE, Shamian J, Tudiver F. The Toronto Breast Self-Examination Instrument (TBSEI): its development and reliability and validity data. J Clin Epidemiol. 1991;44:1309–17.PubMedCrossRef

40.

Pollard WE, Bobbitt RA, Bergner M, et al. The Sickness Impact Profile: reliability of a health status measure. Med Care. 1976;14:146–55.PubMedCrossRef

41.

Whalen CC, Antani M, Carey J, et al. An index of symptoms for infection with human immunodeficiency virus: reliability and validity. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47:537–46.PubMedCrossRef

42.

Folsom AR, Jacobs DR Jr, Caspersen CJ, et al. Test-retest reliability of the Minnesota Leisure Time Physical Activity Questionnaire. J Chronic Dis. 1986;39:505–11.PubMedCrossRef

43.

Andresen EM, Bowley N, Rothenberg BM, et al. Test-retest performance of a mailed version of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey among older adults. Med Care. 1996;34:1165–70.PubMedCrossRef

44.

Shields RK, Enloe LJ, Evans RE, Smith KB, Steckel SD. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of functional tests in patients with total joint replacement. Phys Ther. 1995;75(3):169–76 (discussion 176–179).PubMedCrossRef

Title: Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Slovenian version of Harris Hip Score
Authors: Petra Josipović
Metka Moharič
Dea Salamon
Publication date: 01-12-2020
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Health and Quality of Life Outcomes / Issue 1/2020
Electronic ISSN: 1477-7525
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01592-w

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Slovenian version of Harris Hip Score

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and method

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and method

Results

Conclusion

Trial registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2020

Validation and clinical interpretation of the St George’s respiratory questionnaire for COPD (SGRQ-C) after adaptation to Malaysian language and culture, in patients with COPD

Comparing the EQ-5D-3 L and EQ-5D-5 L: studying measurement and scores in Indonesian type 2 diabetes mellitus patients

The relationship between preference-based health-related quality of life and lifestyle behavior: a cross-sectional study on a community sample of adults who had undergone a health check-up

Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference of the EQ-5D-5L in cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a longitudinal study

The psychometric properties of the Italian adaptation of the Health Orientation Scale (HOS)

Modelling disease course in amyotrophic lateral Sclerosis: pseudo-longitudinal insights from cross-sectional health-related quality of life data