BACKGROUND: Observational instruments, such as the Rapid Entire Body Assessment, quickly assess biomechanical risks present in the workplace. However, in order to use these instruments, it is necessary to conduct the translational/cross-cultural adaptation of the instrument and test its measurement properties. OBJECTIVES: To perform the translation and the cross-cultural adaptation to Brazilian-Portuguese and test the reliability of the REBA instrument. METHOD: The procedures of translation and cross-cultural adaptation to Brazilian-Portuguese were conducted following proposed guidelines that involved translation, synthesis of translations, back translation, committee review and testing of the pre-final version. In addition, reliability and the intra- and inter-rater percent agreement were obtained with the Linear Weighted Kappa Coefficient that was associated with the 95% Confidence Interval and the cross tabulation 2×2. Results : The procedures for translation and adaptation were adequate and the necessary adjustments were conducted on the instrument. The intra- and inter-rater reliability showed values of 0.104 to 0.504, respectively, ranging from very poor to moderate. The percentage agreement values ranged from 5.66% to 69.81%. The percentage agreement was closer to 100% at the item 'upper arm' (69.81%) for the Intra-rater 1 and at the items 'legs' and 'upper arm' for the Intra-rater 2 (62.26%). CONCLUSIONS: The processes of translation and cross-cultural adaptation were conducted on the REBA instrument and the Brazilian version of the instrument was obtained. However, despite the reliability of the tests used to correct the translated and adapted version, the reliability values are unacceptable according to the guidelines standard, indicating that the reliability must be re-evaluated. Therefore, caution in the interpretation of the biomechanical risks measured by this instrument should be taken.
BACKGROUND: Observational instruments, such as the Rapid Entire Body Assessment, quickly assess biomechanical risks present in the workplace. However, in order to use these instruments, it is necessary to conduct the translational/cross-cultural adaptation of the instrument and test its measurement properties. OBJECTIVES: To perform the translation and the cross-cultural adaptation to Brazilian-Portuguese and test the reliability of the REBA instrument. METHOD: The procedures of translation and cross-cultural adaptation to Brazilian-Portuguese were conducted following proposed guidelines that involved translation, synthesis of translations, back translation, committee review and testing of the pre-final version. In addition, reliability and the intra- and inter-rater percent agreement were obtained with the Linear Weighted Kappa Coefficient that was associated with the 95% Confidence Interval and the cross tabulation 2×2. Results : The procedures for translation and adaptation were adequate and the necessary adjustments were conducted on the instrument. The intra- and inter-rater reliability showed values of 0.104 to 0.504, respectively, ranging from very poor to moderate. The percentage agreement values ranged from 5.66% to 69.81%. The percentage agreement was closer to 100% at the item 'upper arm' (69.81%) for the Intra-rater 1 and at the items 'legs' and 'upper arm' for the Intra-rater 2 (62.26%). CONCLUSIONS: The processes of translation and cross-cultural adaptation were conducted on the REBA instrument and the Brazilian version of the instrument was obtained. However, despite the reliability of the tests used to correct the translated and adapted version, the reliability values are unacceptable according to the guidelines standard, indicating that the reliability must be re-evaluated. Therefore, caution in the interpretation of the biomechanical risks measured by this instrument should be taken.
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: Luciola da Cunha Menezes Costa; Christopher G Maher; James H McAuley; Leonardo Oliveira Pena Costa Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2009-09 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: Paula K Hembecker; Diogo C Reis; Andréa C Konrath; Leila A Gontijo; Eugenio A D Merino Journal: Braz J Phys Ther Date: 2017-04-11 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Natália Claro da Silva; Flávia Pessoni Faleiros Macedo Ricci; Vinícius Restani de Castro; Alessandra Cristina Ramos de Lima; Ester R do Carmo Lopes; Leonardo Dutra de Salvo Mauad; Karen A Kawano Suzuki; Maria Eloísa de Oliveira Medeiros; Joyce Silva de Santana; Fernanda Ludmilla Rossi Rocha; Marisa de Cássia Registro Fonseca Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2022-02-05 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Manuel Hita-Gutiérrez; Marta Gómez-Galán; Manuel Díaz-Pérez; Ángel-Jesús Callejón-Ferre Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-04-12 Impact factor: 3.390