Arabic Translation and Linguistic Validation of the SCAR-Q Scale Module

Braizat, Omar; Jafarian, Nasrin; Al-Saigel, Sequina; Jarrar, Salma

doi:10.7759/cureus.20468

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…One study suggested that SCAR‐Q is the first and only validated scar assessment for all scar types 2 . Two studies validated the SCAR‐Q questionnaire in French and Arabic as well 49,50 …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating skin colour diversity in the validation of scar assessment tools

Garg,

Williams,

Taritsa

et al. 2023

Wound Repair Regeneration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Across scar studies, there is a lack of dark‐skinned individuals, who have a predisposition for keloid formation, altered pigmentation, and poorer quality‐of‐life. There is a need for patients‐of‐color to be included in scar scale development and validation. In this study, we evaluate the racial diversity of patients included in the validation of scar assessment scales. A systematic review was conducted for articles reporting on the validation of a scar assessment tool. Racial, ethnic, and Fitzpatrick skin type(FST) data was extracted. Fifteen scar scale validation studies were included. Nine of the studies did not mention FST, race, or ethnicity of the patients. Two of the studies that reported FST or race information only included White patients or included no FST V/VI patients: MAPS and UNC4P. Only four studies included non‐white patients or dark‐skinned patients in the validation of their scar scale: the modified Vancouver Scar Scale, Modified POSAS, Acne QOL, and SCAR‐Q scales. The patients included in the modified VSS validation were 7 and 13% FST V/VI, 14% African in the modified POSAS, and 4.5% FST V/VI in the SCAR‐Q. We highlight the severe lack of diversity in scar scale validation, with only 4 out of 15 studies including dark‐skinned patients. Given the susceptibility of darker‐skinned individuals to have poorer scarring outcomes, it is critical to include patients‐of‐color in the very assessment tools that determine their scar prognosis. Inclusion of patients‐of‐color in scar scale development will improve scar assessment and clinical decision‐making.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating skin colour diversity in the validation of scar assessment tools

Garg,

Williams,

Taritsa

et al. 2023

Wound Repair Regeneration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…With an increasing focus on quality of life, it becomes essential to employ linguistically validated tools for assessing patients and delivering enhanced care. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments like SCAR-Q facilitate result evaluation during follow-up visits, making them integral to the overall treatment process and not to be overlooked [22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polish Translation and Linguistic Validation of the SCAR-Q

Janik,

Opyrchał,

Ambroziak

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) are gaining considerable popularity as tools to assess the effectiveness of the treatment in plastic surgery, being a complement to surgical outcomes. The SCAR-Q questionnaire has been recently developed for patients with surgical, traumatic, and burn scars. AimThe study aims to describe the process of translation and linguistic validation of the scar questionnaire (SCAR-Q) for use in Polish patients undergoing scar treatment. Material and methodsAn official Polish translation and language validation of the SCAR-Q were done in adherence to International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) guidelines. The process consisted of four steps: two independent forward translations, a back translation, a review of the back translation, and cognitive participant interviews. ResultsThe field-tested version of the SCAR-Q consisted of 29 items across three scales measuring appearance concerns, symptoms, and the psychosocial impact of the scar. The forward translation was done by two independent translators and revealed specific difficulties in translation to the Polish language (4/29 items). The back translation showed no significant differences compared to the original English version. Cognitive debriefing interviews involved nine Polish patients with postraumatic scars, burn scars, and scars after skin tumor resection. Participants have not reported any major difficulties in understanding the content of the questionnaire. ConclusionsThe ISPOR provides a straightforward and thorough guideline for the PROMs translation process. The new SCAR-Q is an accessible and efficient PROM that can be implemented in Polish patients to assess the effectiveness of scar treatment.

show abstract

“…The SCAR-Q has been translated in twelve languages, and validated in the French, Arabic, and Italian language [23][24][25]. The French and Arabic study investigated adults.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychometric Performance of the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale and SCAR-Q Questionnaire in Dutch Children after Pediatric Surgery

Ten Kate,

Koese,

Hop

et al. 2023

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: The growing population of survivors following pediatric surgery emphasizes the importance of long-term follow-up. The impact of surgical scars on daily life can be evaluated through patient-reported outcome measurements. The Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale (SBSES) and SCAR-Q questionnaire are two interesting instruments for this purpose. We evaluated their psychometric performance in Dutch children after pediatric surgery. Methods: After English–Dutch translation, we evaluated—following the COSMIN guidelines—the feasibility, reliability (internal and external), and validity (construct, criterion, and convergent) of the SBSES and SCAR-Q in Dutch patients < 18 years old with surgical scars. Results: Three independent observers completed the SB for 100 children (58% boys, median age 7.3 (IQR 2.5–12.1) years) in whom surgery had been performed a median of 2.8 (0.5–7.9) years ago. Forty-six of these children (61% boys, median age 12.1 (9.3–16.2) years) completed the SCAR-Q. Feasibility and internal reliability (Cronbach’s alpha > 0.7) was good for both instruments. For the SB, external reliability was poor to moderate (interobserver variability: ICC 0.46–0.56; intraobserver variability: ICC 0.74). For the SCAR-Q, external reliability was good (test–retest agreement: ICC 0.79–0.93). Validity tests (construct, criterion, and convergent) showed poor to moderate results for both instruments. Conclusions: The Dutch-translated SBSES and SCAR-Q showed good feasibility and internal reliability. External reliability and validity were likely affected by differences in conceptual content between the questionnaires. Combining them would provide insight in the impact of scars on patients. Implementation of these instruments in longitudinal follow-up programs could provide new insights into the long-term psychological outcome after pediatric surgery.

show abstract

Arabic Translation and Linguistic Validation of the SCAR-Q Scale Module

Cited by 4 publications

References 9 publications

Evaluating skin colour diversity in the validation of scar assessment tools

Evaluating skin colour diversity in the validation of scar assessment tools

Polish Translation and Linguistic Validation of the SCAR-Q

Psychometric Performance of the Stony Brook Scar Evaluation Scale and SCAR-Q Questionnaire in Dutch Children after Pediatric Surgery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About