Translation and Linguistic Validation of the Swedish Version of Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey

Jarl, Gustav; Hermansson, Liselotte

doi:10.3109/03093640903168123

Cited by 19 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 24 publications

(36 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We measured patient satisfaction with the Client Satisfaction with Services (CSS) module from the Swedish version of Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS). 16 – 19 A study-specific questionnaire was also used, asking patients (1) the time they spent in the waiting room and (2) what kind of appointment they would prefer, by choosing between (i) a SA with 3–4 months’ indirect waiting time and no direct waiting time and (ii) a MWI with 1–2 months’ indirect waiting time and up to 1 h direct waiting time. A “no preference” option was also available.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A modified walk-in system versus scheduled appointments in a secondary-care prosthetic and orthotic clinic

Jarl

Hermansson

2018

Prosthetics &Amp; Orthotics International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Waiting is common in health care, delays intervention, and has negative effects on satisfaction with services.Objectives:To evaluate effects of a modified walk-in system, where patients were invited consecutively from the waiting list to attend the clinic on a walk-in basis, on waiting times, services, and work environment.Study design:Parallel-group trial.Methods:In all, 1286 consecutive patients in need of shoe insoles were randomized to waiting lists for modified walk-in (n = 655) or a scheduled appointment (n = 631). Seven staff members also participated.Results:The median indirect waiting time to first appointment was 40 days shorter for modified walk-in (135 days) than for scheduled appointment (175 days; p < 0.001); 17% of those randomized to modified walk-in did not attend the clinic compared to 6% for scheduled appointment (p < 0.001). Mean direct waiting time in the waiting room was 9.9 min longer for modified walk-in than for scheduled appointment (p < 0.001). Patients attending modified walk-in or a scheduled appointment reported similar levels of satisfaction with services. Staff reported more support from co-workers with modified walk-in than with scheduled appointment (p = 0.041).Conclusion:The modified walk-in can reduce indirect waiting times without any substantial worsening of direct waiting times, service quality, or work environment. Studies are needed to investigate why many patients drop out from modified walk-in.Clinical relevanceA modified walk-in system can cut the queues and create more timely interventions by reducing indirect waiting times. This system can therefore be recommended in secondary-care prosthetic and orthotic clinics to reduce patients’ suffering from their health condition.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A modified walk-in system versus scheduled appointments in a secondary-care prosthetic and orthotic clinic

Jarl

Hermansson

2018

Prosthetics &Amp; Orthotics International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 8 The CSD was produced in the US English and has been validated also in the Swedish language. 8 – 10 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of the Arabic version of the client satisfaction with device module of the “orthotics and prosthetics users” survey

Bakhsh

Franchignoni

Bravini

et al. 2014

Annals of Saudi Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVESAssessing patient satisfaction with orthosis (PSwO) is a key point for clinical practice to increase a patient’s adherence to therapeutic programs and reduce orthotic-related costs. The Client Satisfaction with Device (CSD) module of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS) is one of the most widely-used questionnaires for assessing PSwO, but its validated version in the Arabic language is lacking. The objective of this study is to generate and psychometrically validate an Arabic version of the CSD (CSD-Ar).DESIGN AND SETTINGSThis is a cross-sectional study, conducted during February to June 2013 at 2 inpatient and outpatient rehabilitation departments in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.PATIENTS AND METHODSTranslation of CSD-Ar was carried out according to the guideline recommendations of Linacre. A convenience sample of 100 orthotic-user patients with various conditions (59% men, mean age 36 years) completed the CSD-Ar. Data were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis followed by Rasch analysis.RESULTSFactor analysis confirmed the unidimensionality of the CSD-Ar. Rasch criteria for the functioning of rating scale categories were fulfilled. All items showed an adequate fit to the Rasch model. The person separation reliability was .75 and Cronbach alpha .83. There was a borderline local dependency between items 1 (“My device fits well”) and 3 (“My device is comfortable throughout the day”).CONCLUSIONThe internal construct validity of the CSD-Ar in Arab patients with various types of orthotics has been confirmed. This study provides a useful starting point for the use of this outcome measure in Arabic-speaking countries.

show abstract

“…Table 2 shows the items of the original CSD that were included in the selected studies. Several articles used all 11 original items [3,6,13,16,20], whereas Amer et al . in 2014 [15] and Jarl et al .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most studies used the four-level Likert scale (strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree), as in the original version [3]. When the response option ‘Not Applicable’ was added, it appears to have been scored as missing [6,14–16,19]. Conversely, Hadadi et al .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2012, the Rasch analysis of the CSD Swedish version [14] – previously cross-culturally translated and adapted from the English version [6] – confirmed the deletion of the two items (#10 and #11) measuring client costs for the device and suggested removing item #8 (‘Clothes wear’). Rasch analysis is a modern sophisticated statistical technique that evaluates the degree to which a scale complies with a wide range of psychometric properties (e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Psychometric properties of the Client Satisfaction with Device module of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS): a scoping review

Sorrentino¹,

Vercelli

Salgovic

et al. 2021

International Journal of Rehabilitation Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient’s satisfaction with device is an important clinical outcome in prosthetics and orthotics. The Client Satisfaction with Device (CSD) – one of the five modules of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS) – has been defined as the only outcome measure specifically developed to measure user satisfaction with a prosthesis or an orthosis. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive review of the psychometric properties of the CSD, summarizing the present evidence on this measure, and verifying if the scoring system is consistent in the literature. A systematic literature search was conducted utilizing PRISMA guidelines. Articles were searched in PubMed and Scopus databases using search terms relating to the psychometric properties of the CSD. Thirteen articles assessing the psychometric properties of the CSD met the inclusion criteria for this review. The CSD has been translated and validated in several languages. However, these versions are not consistent across the studies since they include different number of items, with different number of response options, and scoring systems. The CSD – where used in its eight-item version, rated with a four-point rating scale – can be judged as a tool with acceptable psychometric properties for assessing satisfaction with devices in prosthesis and orthosis users. This CSD version seems the best one for optimizing coverage and psychometric quality with the fewest number of items. Further studies are warranted to assess the degree of suitability of this scale in specific populations of users of prostheses or orthoses and to analyze its psychometric properties in further cultural contexts.

show abstract

Translation and Linguistic Validation of the Swedish Version of Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey

Cited by 19 publications

References 24 publications

A modified walk-in system versus scheduled appointments in a secondary-care prosthetic and orthotic clinic

A modified walk-in system versus scheduled appointments in a secondary-care prosthetic and orthotic clinic

Validation of the Arabic version of the client satisfaction with device module of the “orthotics and prosthetics users” survey

Psychometric properties of the Client Satisfaction with Device module of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS): a scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About