A Systematic Review of Psychometric Properties of Knee-Related Outcome Measures Translated, Cross-Culturally Adapted, and Validated in Arabic Language

Abstract

During the previous two decades, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been well tested, and the tools were validated in different languages across the globe. This systematic review aimed to identify the knee disease-specific outcome tools in Arabic and evaluate their methodological quality of psychometric properties of the most promising tools based on the COSMIN checklist and PRISMA guidelines. Articles published in English, from the inception of databases until the date of search (10 August 2022), were included. Articles without at least one psychometric property (reliability, validity, and responsiveness) evaluation, and articles other than in the English language, were excluded from the study. The key terms [“Arabic” AND “Knee” AND (“Questionnaire” OR “Scale”)] were used in three databases, i.e., PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (WoS) in the advanced search strategy. Key terms were either in the title or abstract for PubMed. Key words were in the topic (TS) for WoS. COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments) risk of bias checklist was used to evaluate the methodological quality of psychometric properties of the Arabic knee-related outcome measures. A total of 99 articles were identified in PubMed, SCOPUS, and WoS. After passing inclusion and exclusion criteria, 20 articles describing 22 scales from five countries were included in this review. The instruments validated in the Arabic language are Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS), knee outcome survey- activities of daily living scale (KOS-ADLS), Oxford knee score (OKS), anterior knee pain scale, osteoarthritis of knee and hip health-related quality of life (OAKHQoL) scale, Lysholm knee score (LKS), international documentation committee subjective knee form (IKDC), intermittent and constant osteoarthritis pain (ICOAP) questionnaire, Kujala patellofemoral pain scoring system (PFPSS), anterior knee pain scale (AKPS) and osteoarthritis quality of life questionnaire (OAQoL),. All were found to have good test-retest reliability (Intra Correlation Coefficient), internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), and construct validity (Visual Analog Scale, Short Form-12, RAND-36, etc.). Of 20 instruments available to assess self-reported knee symptoms and function, 12 were validated in the Saudi Arabian population. Among them, KOS-ADLS is the best PROM to be used in various knee conditions, followed by KOOS and WOMAC. The assessed methodological quality of evidence says that the knee Arabic PROMs are reliable instruments to evaluate knee symptoms/function.

Psychological aspects associated with ACL rehabilitation and recurrence in football players: a systematic review

“…Zotero v. 6.0.26 was used to pool the results of the searches and eliminate duplicate studies. The extraction process was based on the protocol of Ateef et al (2022), which was consulted in the International Prospective Register of Ongoing Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database. Thus, two reviewers performed the inclusion of trials in a two-stage process.…”

Arabic-Translated Versions of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Utilized in Spine Research: A Review of Validated Studies

“…The literature also varies widely in the appraisal of management properties of translated PROMs whether to Arabic [ 2 , 3 , 10 ] or other languages [ 7 , 54 , 55 ]. The reported ranges of good ratings for the various management properties parameters were: internal consistency (20%-94%) [ 2 , 3 , 7 , 10 , 54 , 55 ], reliability (38%-94%) [ 2 , 3 , 7 , 10 , 54 , 55 ], structural validity (25%-87%) [ 2 , 3 , 7 , 10 , 54 , 55 ], cross-cultural validity (3%-38%) [ 2 , 3 , 7 , 10 ], floor/ceiling effect (0-83%) [ 3 , 7 , 10 , 54 , 55 ], content validity (0-59%) [ 2 , 3 , 10 , 54 , 55 ], error measurement (0-55%) [ 2 , 7 , 10 ] and responsiveness (0-44%) [ 2 , 3 , 10 , 54 , 55 ]. The ratings in this review were generally good for internal consistency (87%), reliability (73%), structural validity (63%), and cross-cultural validity (53%).…”

“…Arabic is one of the most commonly spoken languages in the world. It is the official language in 25 countries and is articulated by more than 300 million people [ 1 , 10 ]. Arab countries’ contribution to the neurospine surgical literature may be judged modest.…”

“…The Arabic language has many different dialects, however, modern standard Arabic is widely understood and accepted in formal communication and the media in all Arab countries. In the last two years, three studies reviewed the quality of the Arabic translations of PROMs that were utilized in a wide range of diseases [ 1 , 2 ] or related to a specific anatomical location [ 10 ]. To our knowledge, an evaluation of the Arabic versions of spine-related PROMs has not been addressed in the literature.…”