Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the Turkish version of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to cross-culturally adapt and assess the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the CAIT (CAIT-TR). METHODS: The CAIT was translated and adapted into Turkish according to accepted cross-cultural adaptation guidelines of self-reported measures. A total of 130 individuals, including healthy participants (n = 40) and with chronic ankle instability (CAI) (n = 90), were recruited in this study. The internal consistency and test-retest reliability of the CAIT-TR were assessed using Cronbach's alpha and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), respectively. To assess convergent validity, hypotheses were tested regarding expected correlations between CAIT-TR, Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) subscales, and the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Discriminative validity was evaluated with the hypothesis that the CAIT-TR can distinguish between subjects with and without CAI and also calculated a cut-off score for CAI. The dimensional structure of the CAIT-TR was investigated with confirmatory factor analysis. Additionally, minimal detectable change (MDC), floor/ceiling effects, and measurement error values were determined. RESULTS: The CAIT-TR demonstrated high Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.854) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.919). Regarding convergent validity, the CAIT-TR exhibited a moderate-strong correlation with both the FAOS and VAS. The confirmatory factor analysis supported the unidimensional structure of the questionnaire. The identified cut-off value for the CAIT-TR was 25, and the MDC for individual-level CAIT-TR scores was determined to be 1.87. No floor or ceiling effects were observed. CONCLUSION: The CAIT-TR is a valid and reliable questionnaire for the assessment of ankle instability within the Turkish population.

Validity, reliability, and Rasch analysis of the orthotics and prosthetics users' survey: Turkish version of the lower-extremity functional status.

BACKGROUND: It is well known that questionnaires and scales are easy to use, cheap, and provide fast results. In the clinical setting, it will be easier and more comfortable to evaluate lower-extremity functions in both prosthesis and orthosis users with a single questionnaire. OBJECTIVES: To study the Turkish version of the orthotics and prosthetics users' survey lower-extremity functional status (OPUS-LEFS) and investigate its reliability and validity in the Turkish prosthesis and orthosis users. STUDY DESIGN: After forward and backward translation process, test-retest, internal consistency, validity, dimensionality, and Rasch analysis were done for 139 participants. METHODS: Participants with a lower-limb prosthesis or orthosis were recruited in this study. Test and retest of the survey was done 1-3 days apart. For convergent validity, Nottingham Health Profile was used. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to analyze test-retest reliability; Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency, Spearman's correlation coefficient for validity, exploratory factor analysis by means of Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin and Bartlett's value of sphericity for dimensionality, and Rasch analysis were used. RESULTS: Test-retest reliability of OPUS-LEFS showed very strong correlation (0.994) and for internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha value 0.71 of the Turkish version of OPUS-LEFS. Analyses showed that OPUS-LEFS is valid ( p < 0.001) and significant ( p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Turkish version of the OPUS-LEFS has been shown to be a valid and reliable tool in evaluating both orthosis and prosthesis users with a self-administered questionnaire for LEFS.

Reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the satisfaction module of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey.

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of prosthesis and orthosis (P&O) devices and service satisfaction in patients using P&O are important to understand the patient perspective and improve the quality of devices and the services. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to translate the original Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey (OPUS) satisfaction module into Turkish and examine its psychometric properties in lower limb P&O users. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. METHODS: The Turkish versions of the OPUS-Client Satisfaction with Device (CSD) and Service (CSS) modules were applied to 157 individuals using a lower limb prosthesis or orthosis. The retest of the survey was applied 5-7 days later. Intraclass correlation coefficient was used to determine test-retest reliability, and Cronbach alpha was used to determine internal consistency. Criterion validity was evaluated using the Nottingham Health Profile. Exploratory factor analysis was used to examine the factor structure of the Turkish version of the OPUS satisfaction module. RESULTS: The test-retest correlation (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.92 for CSD and 0.91 for CSS) and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.84 for CSD and 0.95 for CSS) were high. A statistically significant correlation was found between the OPUS CSD and CSS modules and the Nottingham Health Profile (r = -0.325 for CSD module, r = -0.381 for CSS module, P < 0.001). The factor analysis revealed one-factor structure for both modules. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the OPUS satisfaction module, and it provides a useful starting point for future studies on this survey.