CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2019; 54(03): 282-287
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1691764
Artigo Original | Original Article
Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. Published by Thieme Revnter Publicações Ltda Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS): A Cross-Cultural Validation of the Brazilian Portuguese Version Study

Article in several languages: português | English
Rodrigo Kruchelski Machado
1   Hospital Municipal São José/Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Joinville, SC, Brasil
,
André Augusto Casagrande
1   Hospital Municipal São José/Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Joinville, SC, Brasil
,
Gustavo Roberto Pereira
1   Hospital Municipal São José/Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Joinville, SC, Brasil
,
João Ricardo Nickenig Vissoci
2   Departamento de Cirurgia, Divisão de Emergência, Duke University, Durham, NC, Estados Unidos
,
Ricardo Pietrobon
3   University of Maryland, College Park, MD, Estados Unidos
,
4   Departamento de Odontologia, Universidade da Região de Joinville, Joinville, SC, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

12 March 2018

15 May 2018

Publication Date:
27 June 2019 (online)

Abstract

Objective Translated and validated outcome instruments are of great importance, since they can be used for researchers studying different populations with the same problem. The objective of the present study was to translate, culturally adapt and validate the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) into Brazilian Portuguese.

Methods The HOOS was translated from English into Brazilian Portuguese, translated back into English, and submitted to an experts committee. It was administered to 100 patients with hip osteoarthritis. The psychometric evaluation included factor analysis; internal reliability measures, test-retest reliability at 7 days, and construct validity comparison with the Brazilian version of the Graded Chronic Pain Scale (GCPS).

Results Factor analyses demonstrated a five-factor solution. The test-retest reliability showed a high degree of internal consistency for the five subscales (pain and physical difficulties, 0.97 at baseline and 0.93 at 7 days; pain and difficulty sitting, lying down and getting up, 0.93 at baseline and 0.89 at 7 days; difficulty flexing the knee, 0.92 at baseline and 0.83 at 7 days; difficulty walking, 0.88 at baseline and 0.87 at 7 days; quality of life, 0.80 at baseline and 0.35 at 7 days). The construct validity was established during the comparison of the Brazilian version of the GCPS.

Conclusions A Brazilian version of the HOOS was developed with adequate reliability and validity. It will facilitate evaluation of the hip within a large patient population and across cultures.

 
  • Referências

  • 1 Machado GPM, Barreto SM, Passos VM, Lima-Costa MF. [Health and aging study: prevalence of chronic joint symptoms among the elderly in Bambuí]. Rev Assoc Med Bras (1992) 2004; 50 (04) 367-372
  • 2 Goldring SR. Role of bone in osteoarthritis pathogenesis. Med Clin North Am 2009; 93 (01) 25-35 , xv
  • 3 Poolman RW, Swiontkowski MF, Fairbank JC, Schemitsch EH, Sprague S, de Vet HC. Outcome instruments: rationale for their use. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91 (03) (Suppl. 03) 41-49
  • 4 Saleh KJ, Mulhall KJ, Bershadsky B, Ghomrawi HM, White LE, Buyea CM. , et al. Development and validation of a lower-extremity activity scale. Use for patients treated with revision total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87 (09) 1985-1994
  • 5 Taylor MK, Pietrobon R, Menezes A, Olson SA, Pan D, Bathia N. , et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the short musculoskeletal function assessment questionnaire: the SMFA-BR. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87 (04) 788-794
  • 6 Klässbo M, Larsson E, Mannevik E. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score. An extension of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Scand J Rheumatol 2003; 32 (01) 46-51
  • 7 Vaarbakken K, Ljunggren AE. Superior effect of forceful compared with standard traction mobilizations in hip disability?. Adv Physiother 2007; 9 (03) 117-128
  • 8 Gossec L, Hawker G, Davis AM, Maillefert JF, Lohmander LS, Altman R. , et al. OMERACT/OARSI initiative to define states of severity and indication for joint replacement in hip and knee osteoarthritis. J Rheumatol 2007; 34 (06) 1432-1435
  • 9 Ornetti P, Parratte S, Gossec L, Tavernier C, Argenson JN, Roos EM. , et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the French version of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) in hip osteoarthritis patients. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2010; 18 (04) 522-529
  • 10 de Groot IB, Reijman M, Terwee CB, Bierma-Zeinstra SM, Favejee M, Roos EM. , et al. Validation of the Dutch version of the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2007; 15 (01) 104-109
  • 11 Lee YK, Chung CY, Koo KH, Lee KM, Lee DJ, Lee SC. , et al. Transcultural adaptation and testing of psychometric properties of the Korean version of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2011; 19 (07) 853-857
  • 12 Ornetti P, Perruccio AV, Roos EM, Lohmander LS, Davis AM, Maillefert JF. Psychometric properties of the French translation of the reduced KOOS and HOOS (KOOS-PS and HOOS-PS). Osteoarthritis Cartilage 2009; 17 (12) 1604-1608
  • 13 Nilsdotter AK, Lohmander LS, Klässbo M, Roos EM. Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score (HOOS)--validity and responsiveness in total hip replacement. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2003; 4: 10
  • 14 Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000; 25 (24) 3186-3191
  • 15 Hendricson WD, Russell IJ, Prihoda TJ, Jacobson JM, Rogan A, Bishop GD. , et al. Development and initial validation of a dual-language English-Spanish format for the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales. Arthritis Rheum 1989; 32 (09) 1153-1159
  • 16 Gorsuch RL. Factor analysis. Hillsdale: Erlbaum; 1983
  • 17 MacCallum RC, Widaman KF, Preacher KJ, Hong S. Sample size in factor analysis: the role of model error. Multivariate Behav Res 2001; 36 (04) 611-637
  • 18 The R Project for Statistical Computing [acesso em 20 de Janeiro, 2013]. Disponível em: http://www.r-project.org
  • 19 Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1978
  • 20 Carroll LJ, Cassidy JD, Côté P. Depression as a risk factor for onset of an episode of troublesome neck and low back pain. Pain 2004; 107 (1-2): 134-139
  • 21 Cassidy JD, Côté P, Carroll LJ, Kristman V. Incidence and course of low back pain episodes in the general population. Spine 2005; 30 (24) 2817-2823
  • 22 Mercado AC, Carroll LJ, Cassidy JD, Côté P. Passive coping is a risk factor for disabling neck or low back pain. Pain 2005; 117 (1-2): 51-57
  • 23 Von Korff M. Epidemiological and survey methods: assessment of chronic pain. In: Turk DC, Melzack R. , eds. Handbook of pain assessment. New York: Guildford Press; 2001: 603-618
  • 24 Von Korff M, Stewart WF, Lipton RB. Assessing headache severity. New directions. Neurology 1994; 44 (06) (Suppl. 04) S40-S46
  • 25 Smith BH, Macfarlane GJ, Torrance N. Epidemiology of chronic pain, from the laboratory to the bus stop: time to add understanding of biological mechanisms to the study of risk factors in population-based research?. Pain 2007; 127 (1-2): 5-10
  • 26 Dixon D, Pollard B, Johnston M. What does the chronic pain grade questionnaire measure?. Pain 2007; 130 (03) 249-253