Psychometric properties of the Dutch Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) questionnaire in severely injured patients (original) (raw)
Related papers
Injury, 2017
The purpose of this study was two-fold. The first goal was to investigate which variables were associated with the remaining physical limitations of severely injured patients after the initial rehabilitation phase. Second, we investigated whether physical limitations were attributable to the association between psychological complaints and quality of life in this patient group. Patients who were 18 years or older and who had an injury severity score (ISS)>15 completed a set of questionnaires at one time-point after their rehabilitation phase (15-53 months after their trauma). The Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) questionnaire was used to determine physical limitations. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Dutch Impact of Event Scale and the Cognitive Failure Questionnaire were used to determine psychological complaints, and the World Health Organization Quality of Life assessment instrument-BREF was used to measure general Quality of Life (QOL). Differen...
Quality of Life Research, 2017
The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) into Danish (SMFA-DK) and assess the psychometric properties. Methods SMFA was translated and cross-culturally adapted according to a standardized procedure. Minor changes in the wording in three items were made to adapt to Danish conditions. Acute patients (n = 201) and rehabilitation patients (n = 231) with musculoskeletal problems aged 18-87 years were included. The following analysis were made to evaluate psychometric quality of SMFA-DK: Reliability with Chronbach's alpha, content validity as coding according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), floor/ceiling effects, construct validity as factor analysis, correlations between SMFA-DK and Short Form 36 and also known group method. Responsiveness and effect size were calculated. Results Cronbach's alpha values were between 0.79 and 0.94. SMFA-DK captured all components of the ICF, and there were no floor/ceiling effects. Factor analysis demonstrated four subscales. SMFA-DK correlated good with the SF-36 subscales for the rehabilitation patients and lower for the newly injured patients. Effect sizes were excellent and better for SMFA-DK than for SF-36. Conclusion The study indicates that SMFA-DK can be a valid and responsive measure of outcome in rehabilitation settings.
The Health Consequences of Injury Questionnaire
Academic Emergency Medicine, 1995
Objective: To study the properties of a new survey instrument, the Health Consequences of Injury Questionnaire (HCIQ), for measuring the impact of injury on health and to compare the new instrument with the more detailed, previously developed Quality of Well-being (QWB) scale.
The new injury severity score: better prediction of functional recovery after musculoskeletal injury
Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
Injury Severity Score (ISS) is the most widely used method of assessing severity of injury in blunt trauma. It has been recognized that, by only allowing the score to consider the worst injury for each body system, ISS underestimates the problems of multiple musculoskeletal injuries. The New ISS (NISS) allows the three most severe injuries to be scored, irrespective of region affected, and may give better prediction of functional recovery in these patients. A prospective cohort study of 200 patients with musculoskeletal injuries, examining the predictive value of ISS and NISS on functional recovery as measured by patient-derived outcome measures (Short Form-36, Sickness Impact Profile, and Musculoskeletal Function Assessment). NISS was greater than ISS in 34 patients (17%). NISS showed closer correlation with total scores and subscores of the outcomes measures than did ISS (Spearman's rho ranked test, P < 0.05). NISS, a simple modification from ISS, better predicts functional...
The Injury Distress Index: Development and Validation
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2008
Victorson DE, Enders CK, Burnett KF, Ouellette EA. The Injury Distress Index: development and validation.To develop and validate a new measurement tool designed to assess self-reported distress responses after traumatic physical injury.A mixed-methods study design was used. Development of the Injury Distress Index (IDI) included input from patients and experts and a comprehensive literature review. The IDI and validity measures were administered by a trained research assistant at bedside within 1 week of admission. The internal structure (exploratory factor analyses [EFAs]), reliability (internal consistency), and associations with other variables (construct and criterion validity) were examined.Hand, multiple trauma, and burn services at a large southeastern level-1 trauma center.Multicultural cohort of 169 traumatically injured adults (31% hand, 21% burn, 48% multiple trauma).Not applicable.IDI, Trauma Symptom Checklist−40, Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire, Perceived Stress Scale−10, Life Orientation Test−Revised, General Perceived Self-Efficacy Scale, Drug Abuse Screening Test−10, Brief Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test, Abbreviated Injury Scale, hospital length of stay (LOS), postdischarge emergency department visits, and days readmitted to hospital postdischarge.An item pool was developed from patient, expert, and literature review data. EFAs extracted 3 separate factors for posttraumatic stress (avoidance and numbing, re-experience, and hyperarousal: coefficient range, .31−.98), which is consistent with conceptual and diagnostic criteria. EFAs also produced single factors of depression (coefficient range, .44−.72), anxiety (coefficient range, .50−.75), and pain (coefficient range, .57−.79). Most IDI scales (except anxiety) could be differentiated between different levels of injury severity. IDI scales and subscales correlated highly and in a convergent pattern with validity measures of posttraumatic stress (r range, .18−.50), depression (r range, .24−.52), anxiety (r range, .30−.57), and pain (r range, .10−.42), as well as theoretically related variables, such as general distress (r range, .32−.56), self-efficacy (r range, −.15 to −.39), and optimism (r range, −.21 to −.45). IDI scales correlated in a discriminant pattern with measures of drug and alcohol abuse (r range, .02−.07; r range, .09−.21, respectfully). Concurrent and predictive validity evidence was also supported with small associations with injury severity (r range, .16−.30), hospital LOS (r range, .05−.21), number of emergency department visits postdischarge (r range, −.05 to .27), and number of days readmitted to the hospital postdischarge (r range, .05–.21). Cronbach α coefficients were within the acceptable range (α range, .75−.92).A new tool to examine injury-related distress after traumatic physical injury has been developed. Results suggest that IDI scores showed acceptable reliability and validity coefficients with this multicultural sample. Additional validation studies are recommended with larger sample sizes using similar populations to confirm these findings.
Health-related quality of life after upper extremity injuries and predictors for suboptimal outcome
Injury, 2014
The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of upper extremity injuries (UEIs) on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adult patients compared with victims of other types of injuries and with the general population, in order to establish recovery patterns of different types of UEIs and determine predictors for suboptimal outcome in the long term. Data were obtained from the Dutch Injury Surveillance System, from the National Hospital Discharge Registry, and from a patient follow-up survey. A total of 608 patients (aged ≥18 years) with an UEI were included. The main outcome measure was HRQoL measured at 2.5, 5, 9 and 24 months after UEI according to the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D). The predictors for the suboptimal outcome were examined by multivariate linear regression analyses. For non-hospitalized UEI patients, a substantial loss in HRQoL was observed after 2.5 months which improved to the level of the general population norms by 24 months. For hospitalized UEI patients, HRQoL...
2021
The (Quick DASH) Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire is considered one of the widely used questionnaires for assessing and evaluating the functional ability of the patients in terms of upper extremity diseases. This study is done to evaluate the reliability and responsiveness of the shortened Quick DASH questionnaire functional measures in health care. The study was a secondary databased, cross-sectional, longitudinal study of patients with upper extremity injuries. Reliability observed in the analysis by calculating an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient. Responsiveness observed in the analysis by calculating the Effect Size and Standard Response Mean. The Minimal Clinical Importance Difference (MCID) also observed in the review to assess responsiveness. Intraclass Correlation Coefficient observed in the study as a correlating factor between the physiotherapist and patient-perceived level of the overall condition of upper extremity disability. Results dem...