Translation, cross-cultural and construct validity of the Dutch–Flemish PROMIS® upper extremity item bank v2.0

Haan, Erik Jan A.; Terwee, Caroline B.; Wier, Matthew; Willigenburg, Nienke W.; Deurzen, Derek F.P. van; Pisters, Martijn F.; Kaat, Aaron J.; Roorda, Leo D.

doi:10.1007/s11136-019-02388-2

Cited by 10 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We validated the DF-PROMIS-UE v2.0 item bank in a Dutch population with upper extremity disorders. Together with two recent publications from our research group, this study provides the first complete foreign language validation of this item bank [16,17]. Although we found some problems with the unidimensionality and the measurement invariance assumptions of the IRT model, a good IRT model fit and a high reliability across a wide range of the construct for the DF-PROMIS-UE v2.0 item bank were found.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 47%

“…Evidence was found for the following psychometric properties: internal consistency [17], structural validity [17], construct validity [16,17] and crosscultural validity [16]. In addition, absence of floor and ceiling effects in the full bank and the 7-item short form was shown [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Patients were eligible if they were 18 years or older, had an UE disorder, were able to read Dutch and provided informed consent. Because we deemed a sample of at least 500 patients mandatory for item parameter estimation, data of studies performed by van Bruggen et al [17] and Haan et al [16] were pooled [18]. To study measurement invariance for language, we used additional data of US patients from an online panel, aged 18 years or older, who endorsed having some difficulty due to UE pain or function [15].…”

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…PROMIS included an item bank that measures UErelated physical functioning and this bank has recently been updated, from v1.2 to v2.0, to measure a wider range of upper extremity functioning and showed higher precision when used in patients with UE disorders [15]. The v2.0 item bank was translated into Dutch-Flemish (DF-PROMIS-UE v2.0) and some of the psychometric properties of this bank have been studied in patients with UE disorders from a general [16] and an academic hospital [17]. Evidence was found for the following psychometric properties: internal consistency [17], structural validity [17], construct validity [16,17] and crosscultural validity [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The v2.0 item bank was translated into Dutch-Flemish (DF-PROMIS-UE v2.0) and some of the psychometric properties of this bank have been studied in patients with UE disorders from a general [16] and an academic hospital [17]. Evidence was found for the following psychometric properties: internal consistency [17], structural validity [17], construct validity [16,17] and crosscultural validity [16]. In addition, absence of floor and ceiling effects in the full bank and the 7-item short form was shown [16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Graded response model fit, measurement invariance and (comparative) precision of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS® Upper Extremity V2.0 item bank in patients with upper extremity disorders

Lameijer

Bruggen

Haan

et al. 2020

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The Dutch-Flemish PROMIS® Upper Extremity (DF-PROMIS-UE) V2.0 item bank was recently developed using Item Response Theory (IRT). Unknown for this bank are: (1) if it is legitimate to calculate IRT-based scores for short forms and Computerized Adaptive Tests (CATs), which requires that the items meet the assumptions of and fit the IRT-model (Graded Response Model [GRM]);(2) if it is legitimate to compare (sub) groups of patients using this measure, which requires measurement invariance; and (3) the precision of the estimated patients' scores for patients with different levels of functioning and compared to legacy measures. Aims were to evaluate (1) the assumptions of and fit to the GRM, (2) measurement invariance and (3) (comparative) precision of the DF-PROMIS-UE v2.0. Methods: Cross-sectional data were collected in Dutch patients with upper extremity disorders. Assessed were IRT-assumptions (unidimensionality [bi-factor analysis], local independence [residual correlations], monotonicity [coefficient H]), GRM item fit, measurement invariance (absence of Differential Item Functioning [DIF] due to age, gender, center, duration, and location of complaints) and precision (standard error of IRT-based scores across levels of functioning). To study measurement invariance for language [Dutch vs. English], additional US data were used. Legacy instruments were the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), the QuickDASH and the Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 47%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Graded response model fit, measurement invariance and (comparative) precision of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS® Upper Extremity V2.0 item bank in patients with upper extremity disorders

Lameijer

Bruggen

Haan

et al. 2020

BMC Musculoskelet Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Increased Prevalence and Associated Costs of Psychiatric Comorbidities in Patients Undergoing Sports Medicine Operative Procedures

Baron

Khazi

Duchman

et al. 2021

Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preliminary effectiveness of 3D-printed orthoses in chronic hand conditions: study protocol for a non-randomised interventional feasibility study

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionHand orthoses are often provided to improve performance of activities of daily life (ADL). Yet, the manufacturing process of conventional custom-fabricated hand orthoses is a time-consuming and labour-intensive process. Even though three-dimensional (3D) printing of orthoses is a rapidly growing area that can facilitate the manufacturing process of hand orthoses, evidence on the effectiveness, costs and production time of 3D-printed orthoses in chronic hand conditions is scarce. This study aims to assess (1) the preliminary effectiveness of 3D-printed orthoses compared with conventionally custom-fabricated orthoses in persons with chronic hand conditions, (2) production time and costs of both orthoses and (3) experiences of the participants and orthotists with the manufacturing process of the 3D-printed orthosis.Methods and analysisIn this prospective non-randomised interventional feasibility study, 20 adults with various chronic hand conditions using a conventional thumb, wrist or wrist-thumb orthosis will be provided with a 3D-printed corresponding type of orthosis. Assessments will be done 2 weeks prior to the intervention and at baseline for the conventional orthosis, and at 1 month and 4 months follow-up for the 3D-printed orthosis. The primary outcome is change from baseline in ADL performance (custom short form Dutch-Flemish Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-Upper Extremity; ADL domain Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire Dutch language version (MHQ-DLV)) at 4 months follow-up. Secondary outcomes include general hand function (MHQ-DLV), satisfaction with the orthosis (Dutch Client Satisfaction with Device; Dutch version of the Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology), usability (in-house questionnaire) and quality of life (EuroQoL 5-Dimension 5-Level). Costs and production time of the conventional and 3D-printed orthoses will be prospectively recorded. Experiences regarding the manufacturing process will be obtained from participants and orthotists (in-house questionnaire).Ethics and disseminationThe Medical Ethics Committee of the Amsterdam UMC, Academic Medical Centre, has waived the requirement for ethical review of this study. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, scientific conferences, and media aimed at a broad audience including patients.Trial registration numberNCT05320211.

show abstract

Translation, cross-cultural and construct validity of the Dutch–Flemish PROMIS® upper extremity item bank v2.0

Cited by 10 publications

References 60 publications

Graded response model fit, measurement invariance and (comparative) precision of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS® Upper Extremity V2.0 item bank in patients with upper extremity disorders

Graded response model fit, measurement invariance and (comparative) precision of the Dutch-Flemish PROMIS® Upper Extremity V2.0 item bank in patients with upper extremity disorders

Increased Prevalence and Associated Costs of Psychiatric Comorbidities in Patients Undergoing Sports Medicine Operative Procedures

Preliminary effectiveness of 3D-printed orthoses in chronic hand conditions: study protocol for a non-randomised interventional feasibility study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About