Top

Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy

Published in:

01-08-2015 | Ankle

Validation of the Dutch language version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score

Authors: I. N. Sierevelt, L. Beimers, C. J. A. van Bergen, D. Haverkamp, C. B. Terwee, G. M. M. J. Kerkhoffs

Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy | Issue 8/2015

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to develop a Dutch language version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS-DLV) and evaluate its measurement properties according to the definitions of the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN).

Methods

After a standard forward–backward translation procedure, the Dutch version of the FAOS was evaluated for reliability and validity in 110 patients with various hind foot and ankle complaints. Reliability was evaluated by calculation of intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency, and the smallest detectable change (SDC). Construct validity of the FAOS was assessed by calculation of Spearman’s correlation coefficients with similar and dissimilar domains of the SF-36 health survey, American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle and Hindfoot Scale, and visual analogue scales for pain and disability. Dimensionality was tested with confirmatory factor analysis.

Results

Reliability of the FAOS-DLV was good. The ICC of the subscales ranged from 0.83 to 0.88. The minimal value of Cronbach’s alpha was 0.76. The SDC at individual level ranged from 18 to 21 and at group level between 2.1 and 2.5. Construct validity was supported by confirmation of 85 % of the hypothesized correlations. Unidimensionality of the FAOS-DLV domains was moderate.

Conclusion

The Dutch version of the FAOS seems to have acceptable measurement properties. The questionnaire can be used for functional assessment of patients with varying hindfoot and ankle symptoms. It is, however, more suitable for clinical evaluation at group level than for monitoring a specific patient.

Level of evidence

Diagnostic study, Level I.

Aaronson NK, Muller M, Cohen PD, Essink-Bot ML, Fekkes M, Sanderman R, Sprangers MA, Te Velde A, Verrips E (1998) Translation, validation, and norming of the Dutch language version of the SF-36 Health Survey in community and chronic disease populations. J Clin Epidemiol 51:1055–1068PubMedCrossRef

Button G, Pinney S (2004) A meta-analysis of outcome rating scales in foot and ankle surgery: is there a valid, reliable, and responsive system? Foot Ankle Int 25:521–525PubMed

Chen L, Lyman S, Do H, Karlsson J, Adam SP, Young E, Deland JT, Ellis SJ (2012) Validation of Foot and Ankle Outcome Score for hallux valgus. Foot Ankle Int 33:1145–1155PubMedCrossRef

Cronbach LJ (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297–334CrossRef

De Boer MR, de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Moll AC, Völker-Dieben HJM, van Rens GHMB (2005) Changes to the subscales of two vision-related quality of life questionnaires are proposed. J Clin Epidemiol 58:1260–1268PubMedCrossRef

De Groot IB, Favejee MM, Reijman M, Verhaar JA, Terwee CB (2008) The Dutch version of the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score: a validation study. Health Qual Life Outcomes 6:16PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

De Groot IB, Reijman M, Terwee CB, Bierma-Zeinstra SMA, Favejee M, Roos EM, Verhaar JAN (2007) Validation of the Dutch version of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Osteoarthr Cartil 15:104–109PubMedCrossRef

De Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Bouter LM (2006) When to use agreement versus reliability measures. J Clin Epidemiol 59:1033–1039PubMedCrossRef

De Vet HC, Terwee CB, Ostelo RW, Beckerman H, Knol DL, Bouter LM (2006) Minimal changes in health status questionnaires: distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change. Health Qual Life Outcomes 4:54PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

10.

Eechaute C, Vaes P, Van Aerschot L, Asman S, Duquet W (2007) The clinimetric qualities of patient-assessed instruments for measuring chronic ankle instability: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 8:6PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

11.

Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D (1993) Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 46:1417–1432PubMedCrossRef

12.

Hu L, Bentler P (1999) Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model 6:1–55CrossRef

13.

Karatepe AG, Günaydin R, Kaya T, Karlibaş U, Özbek G (2009) Validation of the Turkish version of the foot and ankle outcome score. Rheumatol Int 30:169–173PubMedCrossRef

14.

Kitaoka HB, Alexander IJ, Adelaar RS, Nunley JA, Myerson MS, Sanders M (1994) Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes. Foot Ankle Int 15:349–353PubMedCrossRef

15.

Mani SB, Brown HC, Nair P, Chen L, Do HT, Lyman S, Deland JT, Ellis SJ (2013) Validation of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score in Adult Acquired Flatfoot Deformity. Foot Ankle Int 34:1140–1146PubMedCrossRef

16.

Martin RL, Irrgang JJ (2007) A survey of self-reported outcome instruments for the foot and ankle. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 37:72–84PubMedCrossRef

17.

Martin RL, Irrgang JJ, Lalonde KA, Conti S (2006) Current concepts review: foot and ankle outcome instruments. Foot Ankle Int 27:383–390PubMed

18.

Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, De Vet HCW (2010) The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res 19:539–549PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

19.

Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW (2010) The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 63:737–745PubMedCrossRef

20.

Negahban H, Mazaheri M, Salavati M, Sohani SM, Askari M, Fanian H, Parnianpour M (2010) Reliability and validity of the foot and ankle outcome score: a validation study from Iran. Clin Rheumatol 29:479–486PubMedCrossRef

21.

Roos EM, Brandsson S, Karlsson J (2001) Validation of the foot and ankle outcome score for ankle ligament reconstruction. Foot Ankle Int 22:788–794PubMed

22.

Roos EM, Roos HP, Ekdahl C, Lohmander LS (1998) Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)—validation of a Swedish version. Scand J Med Sci Sports 8:439–448PubMedCrossRef

23.

Schreiber JB, Nora A, Stage FK, Barlow EA, King J (2006) Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: a Review. J Educ Res 99:323–337CrossRef

24.

Streiner DL, Norman GR (2008) Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. In: 2nd (ed) Oxford University Press, New York

25.

Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42PubMedCrossRef

26.

Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, Ostelo RWJG, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW (2012) Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res 21:651–657PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

27.

Terwee CB, Roorda LD, Knol DL, De Boer MR, De Vet HCW (2009) Linking measurement error to minimal important change of patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 62:1062–1067PubMedCrossRef

28.

Ware JE, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30:473–483PubMedCrossRef

29.

Weir JP (2005) Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res 19:231–240PubMed

Title: Validation of the Dutch language version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score
Authors: I. N. Sierevelt
L. Beimers
C. J. A. van Bergen
D. Haverkamp
C. B. Terwee
G. M. M. J. Kerkhoffs
Publication date: 01-08-2015
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy / Issue 8/2015
Print ISSN: 0942-2056
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7347
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3017-2

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Validation of the Dutch language version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Level of evidence

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Level of evidence

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 8/2015

Quantitative pivot shift assessment using combined inertial and magnetic sensing

A randomized prospective controlled study with 5-year follow-up of cross-pin femoral fixation versus metal interference screw fixation in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Implantation of a collagen matrix for an AMIC repair during dry arthroscopy

Measurements of tibial rotation during a simulated pivot shift manoeuvre using a gyroscopic sensor

Clinical outcomes of platelet rich plasma (PRP) as an adjunct to microfracture surgery in osteochondral lesions of the talus

Anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction using a hamstring graft: a retrospective comparison of tunnel widening upon use of two different femoral fixation methods