Validation of the Persian version of Functional Index Questionnaire (FIQ) and Modified FIQ in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome

Abstract

The aim of this investigation was to culturally translate and validate the Functional Index Questionnaire (FIQ) and Modified FIQ (MFIQ) in patients with patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS). A sample of 100 patients with PFPS completed the FIQ and MFIQ, and Short-Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey in the first session. The FIQ and MFIQ were re-administered to a sample of 47 patients to evaluate test-retest reliability. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency were evaluated by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach's alpha coefficient, respectively. Corrected item-total correlations and construct validity were assessed by Spearman's rank correlation. Factor analysis was performed on all items of the Persian FIQ and MFIQ to determine the number of underlying factors and the items which load on each factor. An acceptable level of test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.84, 0.85) and internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.79, 0.82) was obtained for both the Persian FIQ and MFIQ, respectively. Item-total correlations were greater than 0.40 for all but two questions of the Persian FIQ and all but four questions of the Persian MFIQ. A total of two factors were detected for each questionnaire. There were moderate to low correlations between the Persian FIQ/MFIQ and SF-36. Persian FIQ and MFIQ are two reliable and valid outcome measures of functional limitation and it seems that they are suitable for use in clinical practice of patients with chronic PFPS.

The psychological features of patellofemoral pain: a systematic review

“…The SF-36 sub-scales of ‘social function’ and ‘mental health’ both demonstrated small correlations with the Functional Index questionnaire, r=0.23 and r=0.15, respectively (Q3) 34. All SF-36 subscales apart from role emotional (r=0.08) demonstrated small correlations with the Modified Functional Index Questionnaire (Q3) 34…”

“…Supporting comparative data were three high-rating single-group studies (Q337 38;Q445),demonstrating elevated psychological factors compared with six single-group studies that found no difference in measures. Of the latter, four rated poorly (Q126 28 42;Q235) and two rated highly Q334;Q441). Thus, many of these findings suggest that coping strategies including catastrophising may differ in those with PFP, though the clinical relevance of the size of this difference is yet to be determined.…”

Changes in Knee Vastii Muscle Activity in Women with Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome During the Menstrual Cycle

“…Other inclusion criteria were a positive Zohler (Appendix 1) or Clarke sign (Appendix 2), patellar tenderness, and an average pain level in the preceding month of at least 3 on a visual analog scale (VAS) . Additional inclusion criteria were insidious onset of symptoms (nontraumatic), a score of at least 11 on the Persian version of the Functional Index Questionnaire (FIQ), age ≤ 40 years (to reduce the likelihood of osteoarthritic changes), unilateral PFPS, body mass index between 18.5 and 24.9 kg/m 2 , normal menstrual cycle, that is, a self‐reported cycle duration of 22‐36 days with no more than 3 days of variation in cycle length during the previous 3 months, and not using oral contraceptive hormones for 3 months before the start of the study.…”

Reply to Selfe (2014) letter to the editor on: Measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) in patellofemoral pain syndrome: A systematic review

“…The two further studies highlighted by Professor Selfe (Nijs et al 2006;Negahban et al 2013) were also excluded from our review. The abstract for Nijs et al (2006) focused on the diagnostic validity of five clinical PFPS tests without reference to their examination of the measurement properties of a Dutch version of the MFIQ (MFIQ-DV), and this article was therefore excluded at the title/abstract screening phase.…”

“…The abstract for Nijs et al (2006) focused on the diagnostic validity of five clinical PFPS tests without reference to their examination of the measurement properties of a Dutch version of the MFIQ (MFIQ-DV), and this article was therefore excluded at the title/abstract screening phase. The Negahban et al (2013) paper was not eligible for inclusion as it was published after our search to August 2013.…”