Cross-cultural Adaptation and Validation of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form in Filipino
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objectives. The primary objectives of this study were to perform cross-cultural adaptation and to determine the validity and reliability of the Filipino IKDC Subjective Knee Form.
Methodology. The IKDC subjective knee form was translated and cross-culturally adapted to Filipino. The process consisted of a forward translation, backward translation, review of versions by an expert committee, modification of the Draft Filipino version, and pre-testing of the Initial Filipino version. The clinimetric properties of the final Filipino IKDC subjective form, namely face and content validity, construct validity, internal consistency and test-retest reliability were measured from 101 respondents. Face and Content validity were explored with questionnaires, internal consistency was assessed with Cronbach Alpha, test-retest reliability was measured with interclass correlation coefficients, and construct validity was analyzed by comparing scores between respondents
with injured knees with respondents with healthy knees.
Results. The Filipino version of the IKDC subjective form has internally good clinimetric properties. Content validity showed that all items of the Filipino Version of the IKDC subjective form were perceived to be highly relevant by experts. Face validity showed that the participants graded the questionnaire items as easy to understand and relevant to their condition. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability and were interpreted as excellent and acceptable, with an ICC value of 0.99 and Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.702, respectively.
Conclusion. The Filipino IKDC subjective knee form has good face validity, content validity and is a reliable patient reported outcome measure for knee function.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Meta F, Lizzio VA, Jildeh TR, Makhni EC. Which patient reported outcomes to collect after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. Ann Jt. 2017;2:21. https://doi.org/10.21037/aoj.2017.05.10
Van Meer B, Meuffels D, Reijman M. A comparison of the standardized rating forms for evaluation of anterior cruciate ligament injured or reconstructed patients. Chadwick C Prodromos. The anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and basic science. Philadelphia: Elsevier, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-38962-4.00120-X
Ahmad SS, Meyer JC, Krism0er AM, et al. Outcome measures in clinical ACL studies: an analysis of highly cited level I trials. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2017;25(5):1517–27. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27743080 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-016-4334-4
Collins NJ, Misra D, Felson DT, Crossley KM, Roos EM. Measures of knee function: International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) Subjective Knee Evaluation Form, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Physical Function Short Form (KOOS-PS), Knee Outcome Survey Activities of Daily Living Scale (KOS-ADL), Lysholm Knee Scoring Scale, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Activity Rating Scale (ARS), and Tegner Activity Score (TAS). Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011;63 Suppl 11(0 11):S208–28. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22588746 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4336550 https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.20632
Fu SN, Chan YH. Translation and validation of Chinese version of International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33(13–14):1186–9. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20969433 https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2010.524274
Çelik D, Coşkunsu D, KiliÇoğlu Ö, Ergönül O, Irrgang JJ. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the international knee
documentation committee subjective knee form into Turkish. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014;44(11):899–909. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25323139 https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2014.4865
Koumantakis GA, Tsoligkas K, Papoutsidakis A, Ververidis A, Drosos GI. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form in Greek. J Orthop Traumatol. 2016;17(2):123–9. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26093603 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4882291 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-015-0362-y
Haverkamp D, Sierevelt IN, Breugem SJ, Lohuis K, Blankevoort L, van Dijk CN. Translation and validation of the Dutch version of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34(10):1680–4. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16816150 https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546506288854
Kim JG, Ha JK, Lee JY, Seo SS, Cho CH, Lee MC. Translation and validation of the Korean version of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2013;25(3):106–11. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24032098 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3767895 https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.2013.25.3.106
Kümmel D, Preiss S, Harder LP, Leunig M, Impellizzeri FM. Measurement properties of the German version of the IKDC subjective knee form (IKDC-SKF). J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2018;2:31. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30294711 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6092732 https://doi.org/10.1186/s41687-018-0058-1
Metsavaht L, Leporace G, Riberto M, Sposito MMM, Batista LA. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Brazilian version of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form: validity and reproducibility. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(9):1894–9. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20472755 https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546510365314
Padua R, Bondi R, Ceccarelli E, et al. Italian version of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form: cross-cultural adaptation and validation. Arthroscopy. 2004;20(8):819–23. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15483542 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2004.06.011
Lertwanich P, Praphruetkit T, Keyurapan E, Lamsam C, Kulthanan T. Validity and reliability of Thai version of the International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form. J Med Assoc Thai. 2008;91(8):1218–25. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18788694 1
Todor A, Vermesan D, Haragus H, Patrascu Jenel Jr M, Timar B, Cosma DI. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Romanian International Knee Documentation Committee-subjective knee form. PeerJ. 2020;8:e8448. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32117610 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7003694 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.8448
Deviandri R, van der Veen HC, Lubis AMT, Postma MJ, van den Akker-Scheek I. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, validity, and reliability of the Indonesian version of the IKDC Subjective Knee Form. Orthop J Sports Med. 2021;9(9):23259671211038372. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34604432 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8485307 https://doi.org/10.1177/23259671211038372
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000:25(24):3186–91. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11124735 https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Boateng GO, Neilands TB, Frongillo EA, Melgar-Quiñonez HR, Young SL. Best practices for developing and validating scales for health social and behavioral research: a primer. Front Public Health. 2018;6:149. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29942800 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6004510 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149
Epstein J, Santo RM, Guillemin F. A review of guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of questionnaires could not bring out a consensus. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(4):435–41. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25698408 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.021
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:22. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20298572 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2848183 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-10-22
Machin, D et al. Sample sizes for clinical, laboratory and epidemiology studies, 4th ed, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2018.
Bujang MA, Baharum N. A simplified guide to determination of sample size requirements for estimating the value of intraclass correlation coefficient: a review. Arch Orofacial Sci. 2017;12(1):1–11.
Bonett, Douglas G. Sample size requirements for testing and estimating coefficient alpha. J Educ Beh Stat. 2002;27(4):335–40.
https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986027004335
Crawford K, Briggs KK, Rodkey WG, Steadman JR. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the IKDC score for meniscus
injuries of the knee. Arthroscopy. 2007;23(8):839–44. PMID: 17681205 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2007.02.005
Anderson AF, Irrgang JJ, Kocher MS, et al; International Knee Documentation Committee. The international knee documentation committee subjective knee evaluation form: normative data. Am J Sports Med. 2006:128–35. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16219941 https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546505280214
Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(7):737–45. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20494804 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006