Questionnaires and scales for assessment of ankle function: a systematic review of instruments translated and validated for Brazilian Portuguese
Authors:
Prudencio, D. A., Serafim, T. T., Marinho Mateus Lopes, Apsr, Maffulli, N., and Okubo, R.
Abstract:
Purpose: Several questionnaires have been used for functional evaluation. They must be translated and adapted transculturally, these instruments need to be valid, reliable, and sensitive according to the population. This review identified the questionnaires which were adapted transculturally in Brazilian Portuguese, to verify the methodological quality. Methods: A search was performed in the PubMed, BIREME, SportDiscus, SciELO, Scopus, Science Direct, and Web of Science. The methodological quality was evaluated by the COnsensus-based Standards for Health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist. For cross-cultural translation and adaptation studies, the properties of measurement of structural validity, internal consistency (IC), cross-cultural validity, reliability, measurement error, and criterion validity were analyzed. Results: A total of 4564 articles were found; 10 fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The psychometrics properties verified were IC; criterion validity; reproducibility; floor/ceiling effect and responsiveness. Criterion validity was the best criterion evaluated. The main failures were related to sample size, and the most deficient properties were IC, reliability, and error of measure. Conclusions: The studies verified presented "inadequate" final score using COSMIN. Although specific questionnaires for ankle evaluation have been cross culturally validated in Brazilian Portuguese, their methodological quality was generally low, as verified through the analysis of their psychometric properties. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION The questionnaires which were cross culturally adapted to Brazilian Portuguese were shown to be of low methodological quality. In using them careful consideration needs to be given to the psychometrics of each measure. Caution should be exercised in making clinical decisions drawn from the results.
