PURPOSE: This prospective study examined the psychometric properties of the adapted Dutch translation of the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) questionnaire in patients with isolated unilateral lower fracture (LEF) or upper extremity fracture (UEF). METHODS: Patients (N = 458) completed the SMFA, WHOQOL-BREF, and the RAND-36 at time of diagnosis (i.e. pre-injury status), 1, and 2 weeks post-fracture. Principal axis factoring was performed, and Cronbach's alpha coefficients (α) and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated. Furthermore, Pearson's product-moment correlations (r), paired t tests, and standardized response means (SRM) were calculated. RESULTS: A three-factor structure was found: Lower extremity dysfunction, Upper extremity dysfunction, and Daily life consequences. This structure was different for patients with LEF versus UEF. ICCs ranged from .68 to .90, and α varied from .81 to .95. The correlations between the SMFA and, respectively, the RAND-36 and WHOQOL-BREF were small to large depending on the SMFA factor combined with fracture location. Responsiveness was confirmed (p < .0001; SRM ranging from .28 to 1.71). CONCLUSIONS: The SMFA has good psychometric properties in patients with fractures. Patients with UEF and LEF could not be regarded as a homogenous group. The development of separate SMFA modules should be considered.
PURPOSE: This prospective study examined the psychometric properties of the adapted Dutch translation of the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) questionnaire in patients with isolated unilateral lower fracture (LEF) or upper extremity fracture (UEF). METHODS:Patients (N = 458) completed the SMFA, WHOQOL-BREF, and the RAND-36 at time of diagnosis (i.e. pre-injury status), 1, and 2 weeks post-fracture. Principal axis factoring was performed, and Cronbach's alpha coefficients (α) and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were calculated. Furthermore, Pearson's product-moment correlations (r), paired t tests, and standardized response means (SRM) were calculated. RESULTS: A three-factor structure was found: Lower extremity dysfunction, Upper extremity dysfunction, and Daily life consequences. This structure was different for patients with LEF versus UEF. ICCs ranged from .68 to .90, and α varied from .81 to .95. The correlations between the SMFA and, respectively, the RAND-36 and WHOQOL-BREF were small to large depending on the SMFA factor combined with fracture location. Responsiveness was confirmed (p < .0001; SRM ranging from .28 to 1.71). CONCLUSIONS: The SMFA has good psychometric properties in patients with fractures. Patients with UEF and LEF could not be regarded as a homogenous group. The development of separate SMFA modules should be considered.
Authors: Hannu Lehtonen; Teppo L N Järvinen; Seppo Honkonen; Markku Nyman; Kimmo Vihtonen; Markku Järvinen Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Caroline B Terwee; Sandra D M Bot; Michael R de Boer; Daniëlle A W M van der Windt; Dirk L Knol; Joost Dekker; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2006-08-24 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Marcus K Taylor; Ricardo Pietrobon; Andreia Menezes; Steven A Olson; Deng Pan; Neeti Bathia; Robert F DeVellis; Paulo Kume; Laurence D Higgins Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Esther M M Van Lieshout; A Siebe De Boer; Duncan E Meuffels; P Ted Den Hoed; Cornelis H Van der Vlies; Wim E Tuinebreijer; Michael H J Verhofstad Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-02-27 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: M A C Van Son; J De Vries; J A Roukema; T Gosens; M H J Verhofstad; B L Den Oudsten Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2015-11-05 Impact factor: 4.147