Top

Gepubliceerd in:

03-01-2021

Cross-cultural adaptation into French and validation of the SCAR-Q questionnaire

Auteurs: Thomas Radulesco, Julien Mancini, Martin Penicaud, Jean-Jacques Grob, Marie-Aleth Richard, Patrick Dessi, Nausicaa Malissen, Justin Michel

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 4/2021

Abstract

Purpose

Most questionnaires designed to evaluate patient-reported outcomes regarding scarring are available in English. The objective was to generate a validated French version of the SCAR-Q questionnaire.

Methods

The SCAR-Q questionnaire (including Appearance, Symptom and Psychological impact scales) was translated into French using a translation-back-translation process in accordance with international guidelines (ISPOR and WHO). For validation, two hundred patients consulting in our tertiary center completed the questionnaire. We tested scale reliability (Cronbach’s α), floor/ceiling effects and item redundancy (inter-item correlations). Structural validity was tested using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) with the robust weighted least squares (WLSMV) estimator and Delta parameterization. Model fit was examined using the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), the comparative fit index (CFI) and the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI). Correlations between scales and scale repeatability were tested (Spearman coefficient, Intra-class-coefficient).

Results

Four steps were required to obtain a translation consistent with the original version. Two hundred patients completed the questionnaire for validation. Internal consistency analysis found Cronbach’s alphas > 0.7 for all scales (0.90 < α < 0.97). No floor or ceiling effect was found for all items (max = 85%). A ceiling effect was observed for all scales. Appearance and psychosocial impact scale items showed redundancy, with many inter-item correlations above 0.7. The CFA of the original structure displayed a reasonable fit, with RMSEA = 0.065, CFI = 0.974 and TLI = 0.972. Scales were positively correlated (0.45 < ρ < 0.65; p < 0.001). Test–retest intra-class correlation coefficients ranged from 0.94 to 0.99 for all scales.

Conclusion

A French version of the SCAR-Q questionnaire is validated, ready for use.

vorige artikel Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of Nepali versions of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Pain Intensity, Pain Interference, Pain Behavior, Depression, and Sleep Disturbance short forms in chronic musculoskeletal pain

Alleen toegankelijk voor geautoriseerde gebruikers

Finlay, A. Y., Khan, G. K., Luscombe, D. K., & Salek, M. S. (1990). Validation of sickness impact profile and psoriasis disability index in psoriasis. British Journal of Dermatology, 123, 751–756. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.1990.tb04192.x.CrossRef

Zhang, X., Liu, Y., Deng, X., et al. (2019). The correlation between quality of life and acceptability of disability in patients with facial burn scars. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, 7, 329. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2019.00329.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Baumhauer, J. F. (2017). Patient-reported outcomes—Are they living up to their potential? New England Journal of Medicine, 377, 6–9. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp1702978. CrossRef

Klassen, A. F., Ziolkowski, N., Mundy, L. R., et al. (2018). Development of a new patient-reported outcome instrument to evaluate treatments for scars: The SCAR-Q. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open, 6, e1672. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001672.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Ziolkowski, N. I., Pusic, A. L., Fish, J. S., et al. (2020). Psychometric findings for the SCAR-Q patient-reported outcome measure based on 731 children and adults with surgical, traumatic, and burn scars from four countries. Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, 146, 331e–338e. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000007078.CrossRef

Mundy, L. R., Miller, H. C., Klassen, A. F., et al. (2016). Patient-reported outcome instruments for surgical and traumatic scars: A systematic review of their development, content, and psychometric validation. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 40, 792–800. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-016-0642-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Vercelli, S., Ferriero, G., Sartorio, F., et al. (2003). How to assess postsurgical scars: A review of outcome measures. Disability and Rehabilitation, 25, 2055–2063. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638280902874196.CrossRef

Guillemin, F., Bombardier, C., & Beaton, D. (1993). Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: Literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46, 1417–1432. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(93)90142-n.CrossRefPubMed

Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25, 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Chakka, S., & Werth, V. P. (2019). Cross-cultural adaptations of health-related quality of life measures. British Journal of Dermatology, 181, 659–660. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.18272.CrossRef

11.

Vasquez, D., Aguirre, D.-C., & Sanclemente, G. (2019). Construct validity and responsiveness of the Colombian version of Skindex-29. British Journal of Dermatology, 181, 770–777. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.17742.CrossRef

12.

Wild, D., Grove, A., Martin, M., et al. (2005). Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: Report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value in Health, 8, 94–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x.CrossRefPubMed

13.

WHO | Process of translation and adaptation of instruments. In: WHO. https://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/. Accessed 25 April 2020.

14.

Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D. M., de Boer, M. R., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60, 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.CrossRefPubMed

15.

de Vet, H. C. W., Terwee, C. B., Mokkink, L. B., & Knol, D. L. (2011). Measurement in medicine: A practical guide. In: Cambridge Core. /core/books/measurement-in-medicine/8BD913A1DA0ECCBA951AC4C1F719BCC5. Accessed 25 April 2020.

16.

Gadermann, A., Guhn, M., & Zumbo, B. (2012). Estimating ordinal reliability for Likert-type and ordinal item response data: A conceptual, empirical, and practical guide. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17, 1–13.

17.

Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1997). Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ, 314, 572. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.314.7080.572.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/. Accessed 25 April 2020.

19.

Tredget, E. E., Shupp, J. W., & Schneider, J. C. (2017). Scar management following burn injury. Journal of Burn Care & Research, 38, 146–147. https://doi.org/10.1097/BCR.0000000000000548.CrossRef

20.

Kim, B., Sgarioto, M., Hewitt, D., et al. (2018). Scar outcomes in dermatological surgery. Australasian Journal of Dermatology, 59, 48–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajd.12570.CrossRef

21.

Poulsen, L., Rose, M., Klassen, A., et al. (2017). Danish translation and linguistic validation of the BODY-Q: A description of the process. European Journal of Plastic Surgery, 40, 29–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00238-016-1247-x.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Radulesco, T., Penicaud, M., Santini, L., et al. (2018). French validation of the FACE-Q Rhinoplasty module. Clinical Otolaryngology. https://doi.org/10.1111/coa.13267.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Lacasse, Y., & Sériès, F. (2004). Health-related quality of life measurement: A readers’ guide. Revue des Maladies Respiratoires, 21, S63–S70. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0761-8425(04)71462-x.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Cross-cultural adaptation into French and validation of the SCAR-Q questionnaire
Auteurs: Thomas Radulesco
Julien Mancini
Martin Penicaud
Jean-Jacques Grob
Marie-Aleth Richard
Patrick Dessi
Nausicaa Malissen
Justin Michel
Publicatiedatum: 03-01-2021
Uitgeverij: Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 4/2021
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-020-02719-8

Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Log in om toegang te krijgen

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2021

Comparison of psychometric properties of GOHAI, OHIP-14, and OHIP-EDENT as measures of oral health in complete edentulous patients aged 60 years and more

Health care access and health-related quality of life among people with diabetes in the Southern Cone of Latin America—a cross-sectional analysis of data of the CESCAS I study

Post-stroke fatigue level is significantly associated with mental health component of health-related quality of life: a cross-sectional study

Quality of life and associated factors among patients with tuberculosis at the University of Gondar comprehensive specialized hospital, Ethiopia

The effect of hallux valgus open and percutaneous surgery on AOFAS scale: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of Nepali versions of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS®) pain intensity, pain interference, pain behavior, depression, and sleep disturbance short forms in chronic musculoskeletal pain