Cargando…

Reliability and validity of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS)

BACKGROUND: The Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS) are questionnaires that mostly rely on drawings to assess scoliosis patients’ subjective viewpoints on their trunk deformity. Our aim was to perform an in-depth assessment of the psychometric quali...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thielsch, Meinald T., Wetterkamp, Mark, Boertz, Patrick, Gosheger, Georg, Schulte, Tobias L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6208117/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30376891
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-018-0980-1
_version_ 1783366655604162560
author Thielsch, Meinald T.
Wetterkamp, Mark
Boertz, Patrick
Gosheger, Georg
Schulte, Tobias L.
author_facet Thielsch, Meinald T.
Wetterkamp, Mark
Boertz, Patrick
Gosheger, Georg
Schulte, Tobias L.
author_sort Thielsch, Meinald T.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS) are questionnaires that mostly rely on drawings to assess scoliosis patients’ subjective viewpoints on their trunk deformity. Our aim was to perform an in-depth assessment of the psychometric quality of both measures, the SAQ (version 1.1) and TAPS, and compare them to provide practical recommendations. METHODS: Web-based survey study with 255 patients suffering from idiopathic scoliosis (age 30.0 ± 16.7 years, Cobb angle 43.5 ± 20.9°) and 189 matched healthy control individuals. Participants answered a broad set of validated questionnaires including SRS 22-r, PHQ-9, PANAS, FKS, WHO-5, BFI-S, and PTQ. We calculated reliability (Cronbach’s α, test–retest correlations) as well as factorial, convergent, divergent, concurrent, and discriminant validity. RESULTS: Reliability was high (Cronbach’s α ≥ .86; test–retest r ≥ .80), except for test–retest correlation of the SAQ Expectations scale (r = 0.67). Both the SAQ and TAPS measures showed clear factor solutions, indicating factorial validity. High correlations with theoretically related measures (e.g., SRS 22-r, overall stress, Cobb angle) indicated convergent validity. Moderate correlations occurred with concurrent criteria such as mood, depression, body dysmorphic disorder, and well-being. The matched-pair analysis revealed strong evidence for discriminant validity (Cohen’s d > 2 for SAQ total score and TAPS). Subgroup analyses showed that patients with more severe Cobb angles (≥ 40°) and those ≥ 46 years of age had significantly worse SAQ and TAPS scores. CONCLUSION: We recommend using the TAPS for future clinical workups and research, as it is much shorter and revealed slightly higher psychometric quality in comparison to the SAQ. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13018-018-0980-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6208117
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62081172018-11-16 Reliability and validity of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS) Thielsch, Meinald T. Wetterkamp, Mark Boertz, Patrick Gosheger, Georg Schulte, Tobias L. J Orthop Surg Res Research Article BACKGROUND: The Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS) are questionnaires that mostly rely on drawings to assess scoliosis patients’ subjective viewpoints on their trunk deformity. Our aim was to perform an in-depth assessment of the psychometric quality of both measures, the SAQ (version 1.1) and TAPS, and compare them to provide practical recommendations. METHODS: Web-based survey study with 255 patients suffering from idiopathic scoliosis (age 30.0 ± 16.7 years, Cobb angle 43.5 ± 20.9°) and 189 matched healthy control individuals. Participants answered a broad set of validated questionnaires including SRS 22-r, PHQ-9, PANAS, FKS, WHO-5, BFI-S, and PTQ. We calculated reliability (Cronbach’s α, test–retest correlations) as well as factorial, convergent, divergent, concurrent, and discriminant validity. RESULTS: Reliability was high (Cronbach’s α ≥ .86; test–retest r ≥ .80), except for test–retest correlation of the SAQ Expectations scale (r = 0.67). Both the SAQ and TAPS measures showed clear factor solutions, indicating factorial validity. High correlations with theoretically related measures (e.g., SRS 22-r, overall stress, Cobb angle) indicated convergent validity. Moderate correlations occurred with concurrent criteria such as mood, depression, body dysmorphic disorder, and well-being. The matched-pair analysis revealed strong evidence for discriminant validity (Cohen’s d > 2 for SAQ total score and TAPS). Subgroup analyses showed that patients with more severe Cobb angles (≥ 40°) and those ≥ 46 years of age had significantly worse SAQ and TAPS scores. CONCLUSION: We recommend using the TAPS for future clinical workups and research, as it is much shorter and revealed slightly higher psychometric quality in comparison to the SAQ. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s13018-018-0980-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2018-10-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6208117/ /pubmed/30376891 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-018-0980-1 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Thielsch, Meinald T.
Wetterkamp, Mark
Boertz, Patrick
Gosheger, Georg
Schulte, Tobias L.
Reliability and validity of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS)
title Reliability and validity of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS)
title_full Reliability and validity of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS)
title_fullStr Reliability and validity of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS)
title_full_unstemmed Reliability and validity of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS)
title_short Reliability and validity of the Spinal Appearance Questionnaire (SAQ) and the Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS)
title_sort reliability and validity of the spinal appearance questionnaire (saq) and the trunk appearance perception scale (taps)
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6208117/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30376891
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-018-0980-1
work_keys_str_mv AT thielschmeinaldt reliabilityandvalidityofthespinalappearancequestionnairesaqandthetrunkappearanceperceptionscaletaps
AT wetterkampmark reliabilityandvalidityofthespinalappearancequestionnairesaqandthetrunkappearanceperceptionscaletaps
AT boertzpatrick reliabilityandvalidityofthespinalappearancequestionnairesaqandthetrunkappearanceperceptionscaletaps
AT goshegergeorg reliabilityandvalidityofthespinalappearancequestionnairesaqandthetrunkappearanceperceptionscaletaps
AT schultetobiasl reliabilityandvalidityofthespinalappearancequestionnairesaqandthetrunkappearanceperceptionscaletaps