Cargando…

Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS)

BACKGROUND: The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) is a patient-reported questionnaire measuring symptoms and functional limitations of the foot and ankle. Aim is to translate and culturally adapt the Dutch version of the FAOS and to investigate internal consistency, validity, repeatability and res...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: van den Akker-Scheek, Inge, Seldentuis, Arnoud, Reininga, Inge HF, Stevens, Martin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3681600/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23758917
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-183
_version_ 1782273282016280576
author van den Akker-Scheek, Inge
Seldentuis, Arnoud
Reininga, Inge HF
Stevens, Martin
author_facet van den Akker-Scheek, Inge
Seldentuis, Arnoud
Reininga, Inge HF
Stevens, Martin
author_sort van den Akker-Scheek, Inge
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) is a patient-reported questionnaire measuring symptoms and functional limitations of the foot and ankle. Aim is to translate and culturally adapt the Dutch version of the FAOS and to investigate internal consistency, validity, repeatability and responsiveness. METHODS: According to the Cross Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures guideline, the FAOS was translated into Dutch. Eighty-nine patients who had undergone an ankle arthroscopy, ankle arthrodesis, ankle ligament reconstruction or hallux valgus correction completed the FAOS, FFI, WOMAC and SF-36 questionnaires and were included in the validity study. Sixty-five of them completed the FAOS a second time to determine repeatability. Responsiveness was analysed in an additional 15 patients who were being treated for foot or ankle problems. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the FAOS is high (Cronbach’s alphas varying between 0.90 and 0.96). Repeatability can be considered good, with ICC’s ranging from 0.90 to 0.96. Construct validity can be classified as good with moderate-to-high correlations between the FAOS subscales and subscales of the FFI (0.55 to 0.90), WOMAC (0.57 to 0.92) and SF-36 subscales physical functioning, pain, social functioning and role-physical (0.33 to 0.81). Low standard response means were found for responsiveness (0.0 to 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that the Dutch version of the FAOS is a reliable and valid questionnaire to assess symptoms and functional limitations of the foot and ankle.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3681600
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36816002013-06-14 Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS) van den Akker-Scheek, Inge Seldentuis, Arnoud Reininga, Inge HF Stevens, Martin BMC Musculoskelet Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) is a patient-reported questionnaire measuring symptoms and functional limitations of the foot and ankle. Aim is to translate and culturally adapt the Dutch version of the FAOS and to investigate internal consistency, validity, repeatability and responsiveness. METHODS: According to the Cross Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures guideline, the FAOS was translated into Dutch. Eighty-nine patients who had undergone an ankle arthroscopy, ankle arthrodesis, ankle ligament reconstruction or hallux valgus correction completed the FAOS, FFI, WOMAC and SF-36 questionnaires and were included in the validity study. Sixty-five of them completed the FAOS a second time to determine repeatability. Responsiveness was analysed in an additional 15 patients who were being treated for foot or ankle problems. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the FAOS is high (Cronbach’s alphas varying between 0.90 and 0.96). Repeatability can be considered good, with ICC’s ranging from 0.90 to 0.96. Construct validity can be classified as good with moderate-to-high correlations between the FAOS subscales and subscales of the FFI (0.55 to 0.90), WOMAC (0.57 to 0.92) and SF-36 subscales physical functioning, pain, social functioning and role-physical (0.33 to 0.81). Low standard response means were found for responsiveness (0.0 to 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study show that the Dutch version of the FAOS is a reliable and valid questionnaire to assess symptoms and functional limitations of the foot and ankle. BioMed Central 2013-06-11 /pmc/articles/PMC3681600/ /pubmed/23758917 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-183 Text en Copyright © 2013 van den Akker-Scheek et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
van den Akker-Scheek, Inge
Seldentuis, Arnoud
Reininga, Inge HF
Stevens, Martin
Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS)
title Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS)
title_full Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS)
title_fullStr Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS)
title_full_unstemmed Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS)
title_short Reliability and validity of the Dutch version of the foot and ankle outcome score (FAOS)
title_sort reliability and validity of the dutch version of the foot and ankle outcome score (faos)
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3681600/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23758917
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2474-14-183
work_keys_str_mv AT vandenakkerscheekinge reliabilityandvalidityofthedutchversionofthefootandankleoutcomescorefaos
AT seldentuisarnoud reliabilityandvalidityofthedutchversionofthefootandankleoutcomescorefaos
AT reiningaingehf reliabilityandvalidityofthedutchversionofthefootandankleoutcomescorefaos
AT stevensmartin reliabilityandvalidityofthedutchversionofthefootandankleoutcomescorefaos