PURPOSE: There is a lack of standardised outcome measures in Swedish for active, young and middle-aged patients with hip and groin disability. The purpose of this study was to adapt the Danish version of the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) patient-reported outcome instrument for use in Swedish patients and evaluate the adaptation according to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments checklist. METHODS: Cross-cultural adaptation was performed in several steps, including translation, back-translation, expert review and pretesting. The final version was evaluated for reliability, validity and responsiveness. Five hundred and two patients (337 men and 167 women, mean age 37, range 15-75) were included in the study. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha for the six HAGOS-S subscales ranged from 0.77 to 0.89. Significant correlations were obtained with the international Hip Outcome Tool average score (r s = 0.37-0.68; p < 0.01) and a standardised instrument, the EuroQol, EQ-5D total score (r s = 0.40-0.60, p = 0.01), for use as a measurement of health outcome. Test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient) ranged from 0.81 to 0.87 for the six HAGOS-S subscales. The smallest detectable change ranged from 7.8 to 16.1 at individual level and 1.6-3.2 at group level. Factor analysis revealed that the six HAGOS-S subscales had one strong factor per subscale. Effect sizes were generally medium or large. CONCLUSION: The Swedish version of the HAGOS is a valid, reliable and responsive instrument that can be used both for research and in the clinical setting at individual and group level.
PURPOSE: There is a lack of standardised outcome measures in Swedish for active, young and middle-aged patients with hip and groin disability. The purpose of this study was to adapt the Danish version of the Copenhagen Hip and Groin Outcome Score (HAGOS) patient-reported outcome instrument for use in Swedish patients and evaluate the adaptation according to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Status Measurement Instruments checklist. METHODS: Cross-cultural adaptation was performed in several steps, including translation, back-translation, expert review and pretesting. The final version was evaluated for reliability, validity and responsiveness. Five hundred and two patients (337 men and 167 women, mean age 37, range 15-75) were included in the study. RESULTS: Cronbach's alpha for the six HAGOS-S subscales ranged from 0.77 to 0.89. Significant correlations were obtained with the international Hip Outcome Tool average score (r s = 0.37-0.68; p < 0.01) and a standardised instrument, the EuroQol, EQ-5D total score (r s = 0.40-0.60, p = 0.01), for use as a measurement of health outcome. Test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient) ranged from 0.81 to 0.87 for the six HAGOS-S subscales. The smallest detectable change ranged from 7.8 to 16.1 at individual level and 1.6-3.2 at group level. Factor analysis revealed that the six HAGOS-S subscales had one strong factor per subscale. Effect sizes were generally medium or large. CONCLUSION: The Swedish version of the HAGOS is a valid, reliable and responsive instrument that can be used both for research and in the clinical setting at individual and group level.
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: Lidwine B Mokkink; Caroline B Terwee; Donald L Patrick; Jordi Alonso; Paul W Stratford; Dirk L Knol; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2010-02-19 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Lucy Busija; Richard H Osborne; Anna Nilsdotter; Rachelle Buchbinder; Ewa M Roos Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2008-07-31 Impact factor: 3.186