Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Orthopaedic Science
Published in: Journal of Orthopaedic Science 5/2013

Open Access 01-09-2013 | Original Article

Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the patient-rated elbow evaluation

Authors: Tadamasa Hanyu, Mikihiko Watanabe, Takashi Masatomi, Keiichiro Nishida, Teruhiko Nakagawa, Yasumasa Nishiura, Hiroyuki Ohi

Published in: Journal of Orthopaedic Science | Issue 5/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The patient-rated elbow evaluation (PREE) is a joint-specific, self-administered questionnaire consisting of a pain scale (PREE-P) and a functional scale (PREE-F), the latter consisting of specific function (PREE-SF) and usual function (PREE-UF). The purpose of this study was to cross-culturally adapt the PREE into Japanese (PREE-J) and to test its reliability, validity, and responsiveness.

Methods

A consecutive series of 74 patients with elbow disorder completed the PREE-J, the Japanese version of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH–JSSH) questionnaire, and the official Japanese version of the 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Of the 74 patients, 53 were reassessed for test–retest reliability 1 or 2 weeks later. Reliability was investigated in terms of reproducibility and internal consistency. The validity of the PREE-J was examined by factor analysis, and correlation coefficients were obtained using the PREE-J, DASH-JSSH, and SF-36. Responsiveness was examined by calculating the standardized response mean (SRM) and effect size after elbow surgery in 53 patients.

Results

Cronbach’s α coefficients for PREE-P, PREE-F, and PREE were 0.92, 0.97, and 0.97, respectively, and the corresponding intraclass correlation coefficients were 0.92, 0.93, and 0.94, respectively. Unidimensionality of PREE-P and PREE-F was confirmed by factor analysis. The coefficients of correlation between PREE-P and PREE-F or DASH–JSSH were 0.81 and 0.74, respectively; that between PREE-F and DASH–JSSH was 0.86, and those between DASH–JSSH and PREE-SF or PREE-UF were 0.85 and 0.82, respectively. Moderate correlation was observed in “physical functioning” for SF-36 and PREE-F (r = −0.69) or PREE (r = −0.68). The SRMs/effect sizes of PREE-P (1.31/1.32) or PREE (1.28/1.12) were more responsive than the DASH–JSSH (0.99/0.85), “bodily pain” (−1.15/−1.43), and “physical functioning” (−0.70/−0.44) in SF-36.

Conclusion

The PREE-J represents a reliable, valid, and responsive instrument and has evaluation capacities equivalent to those of the original PREE.
Literature
1.
Lingard EA, Hashimoto H, Sledge CB. Development of outcome research for total joint arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci. 2000;5:175–7.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Fukuhara S, Bito S, Green J, Hirota A, Kurokawa K. Translation, adaptation, and validation of the SF-36 health survey for use in Japan. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51:1037–44.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Group EuroQol. EuroQol — a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208.CrossRef
4.
Roach KE, Budiman-Mak E, Songsiridej N, Lertratanakul Y. Development of a shoulder pain and disability index. Arthritis Care Res. 1991;4:143–9.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Levine DW, Simmons BP, Koris MJ, Daltroy LH, Hohl GG, Fossel AH, Katz JN, et al. A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75:1585–92.PubMed
6.
Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECO). Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand). Am J Ind Med. 1996;29:602–8.PubMedCrossRef
7.
MacDermid JC. Development of a scale for patient rating of wrist pain and disability. J Hand Ther. 1996;9:178–83.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Chung KC, Pillsbury MS, Walter MR, Hayward RA. Reliability and validity testing of the Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire. J Hand Surg. 1998;23:575–87.CrossRef
9.
Imaeda T, Toh S, Nakao Y, Nashida J, Hirata H, Ijichi M, Kohri C, Nagano A, Impairment Evaluation Committee, Japanese Society for Surgery of the Hand. Validation of the Japanese Society for Surgery of the Hand Version of the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH-JSSH) questionnaire. J Orthop Sci. 2005;10:353–9.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Imaeda T, Uchiyama S, Wada T, Okinaga S, Sawaizumi T, Omokawa S, Momose T, Moritomo H, Gotani H, Abe Y, Nishida J, Kanaya F, Clinical Outcomes Committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association and the Functional Evaluation Committee of the Japanese Society for Surgery of the Hand. Reliability, validity, responsiveness of the Japanese version of the patient-rated wrist evaluation. J Orthop Sci. 2010;15:509–17.PubMedCrossRef
11.
MacDermid JC. Outcome evaluation in patients with elbow pathology: issues in instrument development and evaluation. J Hand Ther. 2001;14:105–14.PubMedCrossRef
12.
John M, Angst F, Pap G, Junge A, Mannion AF. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the patient rated elbow evaluation (PREE) for German-speaking patients. Clin Exp Rheumatol. 2007;25:195–205.PubMed
13.
Guillemin F. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of health status measures. Scand J Rheumatol. 1995;24:61–3.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Liang MH, Fossel AH, Larson MG. Comparisons of five health status instruments for orthopedic evaluation. Med Care. 1990;28:632–42.PubMedCrossRef
15.
Kazis LE, Anderson JJ, Meenan RF. Effect sizes for interpreting changes in health status. Med Care. 1989;27:S178–89.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Hashimoto H, Hanyu T, Sledge CB, Lingard EA. Validation of a Japanese patient-derived outcome scale for assessing total knee arthroplasty: comparison with WOMAC osteoarthritis index. J Orthop Sci. 2003;8:288–93.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Lingard EA, Katz JN, John Wright R, Wright EA EA, Sledge CB, the Kinemax Outcomes Group. Validity and responsiveness of the knee society clinical rating system in comparison with the SF-36 and WOMAC. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:1856–64.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the patient-rated elbow evaluation
Authors
Tadamasa Hanyu
Mikihiko Watanabe
Takashi Masatomi
Keiichiro Nishida
Teruhiko Nakagawa
Yasumasa Nishiura
Hiroyuki Ohi
Publication date
01-09-2013
Publisher
Springer Japan
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Science / Issue 5/2013
Print ISSN: 0949-2658
Electronic ISSN: 1436-2023
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-013-0408-z

Other articles of this Issue 5/2013

Journal of Orthopaedic Science 5/2013 Go to the issue

Original Article

Osteoprotective effect of propranolol in ovariectomized rats: a comparison with zoledronic acid and alfacalcidol

Original Article

Change with increasing age in control of the lower limbs during jump–landing in adolescents: a 5-year prospective study

Original Article

Arthroscopic excision of separated ossicles of the lateral malleolus

Case Report

Improvement of atelectasis after corrective fusion for lordoscoliosis with intrathoracic vertebral protrusion in arthrogryposis multiplex congenita: efficacy of positive-pressure ventilation test

Original Article

Anatomical considerations for reconstruction of the Lisfranc ligament

Original Article

Posterior buttress plate with locking compression plate for Hoffa fracture