Systematic Review and Appraisal of the Cross‐Cultural Validity of Functional Status Assessment Measures in Rheumatoid Arthritis

Abstract

Objective. We conducted a systematic review and appraisal of the cross-cultural adaptation and cross-cultural validity of the Health Assessment Questionnaire (HAQ) and its derivatives, and of the more recent Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) functional status assessment measures (FSAMs) in rheumatoid arthritis.Methods. Four electronic medical databases were searched from inception until April 4, 2018 according to the Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) group search strategy. Included studies were evaluated using the COSMIN tool for cross-cultural validity and were scored as excellent, good, fair, or poor.Results. Of 58 articles identified by our search strategy and 3 by manual search, 39 were included: 29 described the translation, cultural adaptation, or cross-cultural validity of the HAQ disability index, 8 other HAQ derivatives, and 2 PROMIS measures, representing 22 languages. Of the 39 articles reviewed, 3 examined the cross-cultural validity of translated versions. These studies were rated as follows: 2 as excellent, 3 good, 13 fair, and 21 poor. Two studies examining cross-cultural validity noted differential item functioning (DIF) between Dutch and US populations for the HAQ-II and PROMIS measures, and a third study found DIF between Turkish and UK populations on the HAQ, indicating cultural differences in questionnaire response.Conclusion. This review highlights a paucity of data on the cross-cultural validity of FSAMs and the mostly pooror fair-quality methods by which they were translated and adapted, which needs to be considered when using these measures for multinational clinical trials and for day-to-day use in clinical practice.

Predictors of functional capacity as measured by the Glittre activities of daily living test in women with rheumatoid arthritis

“…However, unlike the GA-T, the TUG test does not incorporate upper limb activities, which are often the main reasons for disability in this population. Our results also support recommendations by the American College of Rheumatology that the HAQ-DI must be repeatedly evaluated in clinical practice to track patient outcomes and guide shared decision-making ( 36 ). However, it is important to highlight the limitations of the HAQ-DI in the evaluation of more complex daily activities and its lack of sensitivity regarding the detection of changes in patients with low weakness (“floor effect”) ( 37 ).…”

Satisfaction and experience with colorectal cancer screening: a systematic review of validated patient reported outcome measures

“…In the same way, the post-procedure questionnaire [ 35 ] was developed and validated in a population from the USA and is only available in English. If questionnaires are used in countries other than those in which they have been developed and validated, it is necessary to translate them (with a translation-back translation process), conduct a culturally adaptation and finally study their cross-cultural validity before their use [ 28 , 41 – 44 ]. Cross-cultural validity is evaluated assessing whether the scale is measurement invariant or whether differential item functioning occurs between at least two culturally different groups of people [ 23 ].…”

Measures of Rheumatoid Arthritis Disease Activity

“…Although the cross‐cultural validity of the PAS and PAS‐II has not been specifically assessed, translations and cultural adaptations of the HAQ and HAQ‐II are available in several languages (95).…”