Assessment of the test-retest reliability and construct validity of a modified Lequesne index in knee osteoarthritis

2003 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
pp. 520-525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Faucher ◽  
Serge Poiraudeau ◽  
Marie Martine Lefevre-Colau ◽  
François Rannou ◽  
Jacques Fermanian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Lequesne Index ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

scholarly journals Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Fremantle Knee Awareness Questionnaire in Italian subjects with painful knee osteoarthritis

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Monticone ◽  
Cristiano Sconza ◽  
Igor Portoghese ◽  
Tomohiko Nishigami ◽  
Benedict M. Wand ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Pain Intensity ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Structural Validity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Pain Catastrophising ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Painful Knee

Abstract Background and aim Growing attention is being given to utilising physical function measures to better understand and manage knee osteoarthritis (OA). The Fremantle Knee Awareness Questionnaire (FreKAQ), a self-reported measure of body-perception specific to the knee, has never been validated in Italian patients. The aims of this study were to culturally adapt and validate the Italian version of the FreKAQ (FreKAQ-I), to allow for its use with Italian-speaking patients with painful knee OA. Methods The FreKAQ-I was developed by means of forward–backward translation, a final review by an expert committee and a test of the pre-final version to evaluate its comprehensibility. The psychometric testing included: internal structural validity by Rasch analysis; construct validity by assessing hypotheses of FreKAQ correlations with the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), a pain intensity numerical rating scale (PI-NRS), the pain catastrophising scale (PCS), and the Hospital anxiety and depression score (HADS) (Pearson’s correlations); known-group validity by evaluating the ability of FreKAQ scores to discriminate between two groups of participants with different clinical profiles (Mann–Whitney U test); reliability by internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha) and test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC2.1); and measurement error by calculating the minimum detectable change (MDC). Results It took one month to develop a consensus-based version of the FreKAQ-I. The questionnaire was administered to 102 subjects with painful knee OA and was well accepted. Internal structural validity confirmed the substantial unidimensionality of the FreKAQ-I: variance explained was 53.3%, the unexplained variance in the first contrast showed an eigenvalue of 1.8, and no local dependence was detected. Construct validity was good as all of the hypotheses were met; correlations: KOOS (rho = 0.38–0.51), PI-NRS (rho = 0.35–0.37), PCS (rho = 0.47) and HADS (Anxiety rho = 0.36; Depression rho = 0.43). Regarding known-groups validity, FreKAQ scores were significantly different between groups of participants demonstrating high and low levels of pain intensity, pain catastrophising, anxiety, depression and the four KOOS subscales (p ≤ 0.004). Internal consistency was acceptable (α = 0.74) and test–retest reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.92, CI 0.87–0.94). The MDC95 was 5.22 scale points. Conclusion The FreKAQ-I is unidimensional, reliable and valid in Italian patients with painful knee OA. Its use is recommended for clinical and research purposes.

scholarly journals Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the English Lequesne Algofunctional index in to Bengali

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tarek Mahmood ◽  
Minhaj Rahim Choudhury ◽  
Md Nazrul Islam ◽  
Syed Atiqul Haq ◽  
Md Abu Shahin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Correlation Coefficient ◽  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Cultural Adaptation ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Divergent Validity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background This study was focused on translation and cultural adaptation of the English Lequesne Algofunctional index (LAI) into Bengali for patients with primary knee osteoarthritis (OA) and testing reliability and validity of the Bengali version of the LAI. Methods This study was carried out in the Department of Rheumatology, BSM Medical University, Dhaka, Bangladesh. Using the forward–backward method the English LAI was translated into Bengali including cultural adaptation. For pretesting, A sample of 40 patients with primary knee osteoarthritis were screened using the Bengali version of LAI. Following the pretest, 130 consecutive patients with symptomatic knee OA completed the interviewer administered Bengali LAI, the validated Bengali version of SF-36, Visual Analogue Scale for Pain, Distance Walked and Activities of Daily Living. For the retest 60 randomly selected patients from the cohort were administered the Bengali LAI 7 days later. An item by item analysis was performed. Internal consistency was assessed by Cronbach’s alpha, test–retest reliability by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Kappa coefficient, construct validity was measured using the Spearman rank correlation coefficient. Results It took 3.25 ± 0.71 min to complete the Bengali LAI and the mean score was 9.23 ± 4.58. For the Bengali LAI Cronbach’s alpha score was 0.88, test–retest reliability assessed by ICC was 0.97. For construct validity, excellent convergent validity was achieved (ρ = 0.93) but the divergent validity was moderate (ρ = 0.43). Conclusions The Bengali LAI showed excellent convergent validity, internal consistency and test–retest reliability, only the divergent validity was moderate. So, the Bengali LAI can be applied as a HRQoL assessment tool for primary knee OA patients.

scholarly journals Patient-reported quality indicators to evaluate physiotherapy care for hip and/or knee osteoarthritis- development and evaluation of the QUIPA tool.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pek Ling Teo ◽  
Rana S Hinman ◽  
Thorlene Egerton ◽  
Krysia S Dziedzic ◽  
Jess Kasza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Quality Indicator ◽  
Clinical Guideline ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background: There is no physiotherapy-specific quality indicator tool available to evaluate physiotherapy care for people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to develop a patient-reported quality indicator tool (QUIPA) for physiotherapy management of hip and knee OA and to assess its reliability and validity. Methods: To develop the QUIPA tool, quality indicators were initially developed based on clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy practice and those of an existing generic OA quality indicator tool. Draft items were then further refined using patient focus groups. Test-retest reliability, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity were then evaluated. Sixty-five people with hip and/or knee OA attended a single physiotherapy consultation and completed the QUIPA tool one, twelve- and thirteen-weeks after. Physiotherapists (n=9) completed the tool post-consultation. Patient test-retest reliability was assessed between weeks twelve and thirteen. Construct validity was assessed with three predefined hypotheses and criterion validity was based on agreement between physiotherapists and participants at week one. Results: A draft list of 23 clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy was developed. Following feedback from three patient focus groups, the final QUIPA tool contained 18 items (three subscales) expressed in lay language. The test-retest reliability estimates (Cohen’s Kappa) for single items ranged from 0.30-0.83 with observed agreement of 64-94%. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the Assessment and Management Planning subscale was 0.70 (0.54, 0.81), Core Recommended Treatments subscale was 0.84 (0.75, 0.90), Adjunctive Treatments subscale was 0.70 (0.39, 0.87) and for the total QUIPA score was 0.80 (0.69, 0.88). All predefined hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. However, agreement between physiotherapists and participants for single items showed large measurement error (Cohen’s Kappa estimates ranged from -0.04-0.59) with the ICC (95% CI) for the total score being 0.11 (-0.14, 0.34). Conclusions: The QUIPA tool showed acceptable test-retest reliability for subscales and total score but inadequate reliability for individual items. Construct validity was confirmed but criterion validity for individual items, subscales and the total score was inadequate. Further research is needed to refine the QUIPA tool to improve its clinimetric properties before implementation.

Assessment of the test–retest reliability and construct validity of a modified WOMAC index in knee osteoarthritis

2004 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc Faucher ◽  
Serge Poiraudeau ◽  
Marie Martine Lefevre-Colau ◽  
François Rannou ◽  
Jacques Fermanian ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Womac Index ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

scholarly journals Patient-reported quality indicators to evaluate physiotherapy care for hip and/or knee osteoarthritis- development and evaluation of the QUIPA tool.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pek Ling Teo ◽  
Rana S Hinman ◽  
Thorlene Egerton ◽  
Krysia S Dziedzic ◽  
Jess Kasza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Quality Indicator ◽  
Clinical Guideline ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background: There is no physiotherapy-specific quality indicator tool available to evaluate physiotherapy care for people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to develop a patient-reported quality indicator tool (QUIPA) for physiotherapy management of hip and knee OA and to assess its reliability and validity. Methods: To develop the QUIPA tool, quality indicators were initially developed based on clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy practice and those of an existing generic OA quality indicator tool. Draft items were then further refined using patient focus groups. Test-retest reliability, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity were then evaluated. Sixty-five people with hip and/or knee OA attended a single physiotherapy consultation and completed the QUIPA tool one, twelve- and thirteen-weeks after. Physiotherapists (n=9) completed the tool post-consultation. Patient test-retest reliability was assessed between weeks twelve and thirteen. Construct validity was assessed with three predefined hypotheses and criterion validity was based on agreement between physiotherapists and participants at week one. Results: A draft list of 23 clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy was developed. Following feedback from three patient focus groups, the final QUIPA tool contained 18 items (three subscales) expressed in lay language. The test-retest reliability estimates (Cohen’s Kappa) for single items ranged from 0.30-0.83 with observed agreement of 64-94%. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the Assessment and Management Planning subscale was 0.70 (0.54, 0.81), Core Recommended Treatments subscale was 0.84 (0.75, 0.90), Adjunctive Treatments subscale was 0.70 (0.39, 0.87) and for the total QUIPA score was 0.80 (0.69, 0.88). All predefined hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. However, agreement between physiotherapists and participants for single items showed large measurement error (Cohen’s Kappa estimates ranged from -0.04-0.59) with the ICC (95% CI) for the total score being 0.11 (-0.14, 0.34). Conclusions: The QUIPA tool showed acceptable test-retest reliability for subscales and total score but inadequate reliability for individual items. Construct validity was confirmed but criterion validity for individual items, subscales and the total score was inadequate. Further research is needed to refine the QUIPA tool to improve its clinimetric properties before implementation.

scholarly journals Patient-reported quality indicators to evaluate physiotherapy care for hip and/or knee osteoarthritis- development and evaluation of the QUIPA tool.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pek Ling Teo ◽  
Rana S Hinman ◽  
Thorlene Egerton ◽  
Krysia S Dziedzic ◽  
Jess Kasza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construct Validity ◽  
Knee Osteoarthritis ◽  
Focus Groups ◽  
Quality Indicator ◽  
Clinical Guideline ◽  
Criterion Validity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Knee Oa ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background: There is no physiotherapy-specific quality indicator tool available to evaluate physiotherapy care for people with hip and/or knee osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to develop a patient-reported quality indicator tool (QUIPA) for physiotherapy management of hip and knee OA and to assess its reliability and validity. Methods: To develop the QUIPA tool, quality indicators were initially developed based on clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy practice and those of an existing generic OA quality indicator tool. Draft items were then further refined using patient focus groups. Test-retest reliability, construct validity (hypothesis testing) and criterion validity were then evaluated. Sixty-five people with hip and/or knee OA attended a single physiotherapy consultation and completed the QUIPA tool one, twelve- and thirteen-weeks after. Physiotherapists (n=9) completed the tool post-consultation. Patient test-retest reliability was assessed between weeks twelve and thirteen. Construct validity was assessed with three predefined hypotheses and criterion validity was based on agreement between physiotherapists and participants at week one. Results: A draft list of 23 clinical guideline recommendations most relevant to physiotherapy was developed. Following feedback from three patient focus groups, the final QUIPA tool contained 18 items (three subscales) expressed in lay language. The test-retest reliability estimates (Cohen’s Kappa) for single items ranged from 0.30-0.83 with observed agreement of 64-94%. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the Assessment and Management Planning subscale was 0.70 (0.54, 0.81), Core Recommended Treatments subscale was 0.84 (0.75, 0.90), Adjunctive Treatments subscale was 0.70 (0.39, 0.87) and for the total QUIPA score was 0.80 (0.69, 0.88). All predefined hypotheses regarding construct validity were confirmed. However, agreement between physiotherapists and participants for single items showed large measurement error (Cohen’s Kappa estimates ranged from -0.04-0.59) with the ICC (95% CI) for the total score being 0.11 (-0.14, 0.34). Conclusions: The QUIPA tool showed acceptable test-retest reliability for subscales and total score but inadequate reliability for individual items. Construct validity was confirmed but criterion validity for individual items, subscales and the total score was inadequate. Further research is needed to refine the QUIPA tool to improve its clinimetric properties before implementation.

Reliability, Validity and Responsiveness of Physical Activity Monitors in Patients with Inflammatory Myopathy

Rheumatology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bonny Rockette-Wagner ◽  
Didem Saygin ◽  
Siamak Moghadam-Kia ◽  
Chester Oddis ◽  
Océane Landon-Cardinal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Construct Validity ◽  
Disease Activity ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Activity Monitors ◽  
Muscle Testing ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Physical Activity Monitors ◽  
Global Disease Activity ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Objective Idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) cause proximal muscle weakness, which affect activities of daily living. Wearable physical activity monitors (PAMs) objectively assess continuous activity with potential clinical usefulness in IIM assessment. We examined the psychometric characteristics for PAM outcomes in IIM. Methods Adult IIM patients were prospectively evaluated (baseline, 3 and 6-months) in an observational study. A waist-worn PAM (ActiGraph GT3X-BT) assessed average step counts/min, peak 1-min cadence, and vector magnitude/min. Validated myositis core set measures (CSM) including manual muscle testing (MMT), physician global disease activity (MD global), patient global disease activity (Pt global), extra-muscular disease activity (Ex-muscular global), HAQ-DI, muscle enzymes, and patient-reported physical function were evaluated. Test-retest reliability, construct validity, and responsiveness were determined for PAM measures and CSM using Pearson correlations and other appropriate analyses. Results 50 adult IIM patients enrolled [mean (SD) age, 53.6 (±14.6); 60% female, 94% Caucasian]. PAM measures showed strong test-retest reliability, moderate-to-strong correlations at baseline with MD global (r=-0.37- -0.48), Pt-global (r=-0.43- -0.61), HAQ-DI (r=-0.47- -0.59) and MMT (r = 0.37–0.52), and strong discriminant validity for categorical MMT and HAQ-DI. Longitudinal association with MD global (r=-0.38- -0.44), MMT (r = 0.50–0.57), HAQ-DI (r=-0.45- -0.55), and functional tests (r = 0.30–0.65) were moderate-to-strong. PAM measures were responsive to MMT improvement (≥10%) and moderate-to-major improvement on ACR/EULAR myositis response criteria. Peak 1-min cadence had the largest effect size and Standardized Response Means (SRMs). Conclusion PAM measures showed promising construct validity, reliability, and longitudinal responsiveness; especially peak 1-min cadence. PAMs provide valid outcome measures for future use in IIM clinical trials.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document