%0 Journal Article
%T Validity and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Persian Version of the Oxford Elbow Score
%A Mohammad H. Ebrahimzadeh
%A Amir Reza Kachooei
%A Ehsan Vahedi
%A Ali Moradi
%A Zeinab Mashayekhi
%A Mohammad Hallaj-Moghaddam
%A Mehran Azami
%A Ali Birjandinejad
%J International Journal of Rheumatology
%D 2014
%I Hindawi Publishing Corporation
%R 10.1155/2014/381237
%X Oxford Elbow Score (OES) is a patient-reported questionnaire used to assess outcomes after elbow surgery. The aim of this study was to validate and adapt the OES into Persian language. After forward-backward translation of the OES into Persian, a total number of 92 patients after elbow surgeries completed the Persian OES along with the Persian DASH and SF-36. To assess test-retest reliability, 31 randomly selected patients (34%) completed the Persian OES again after three days while abstaining from all forms of therapeutic regimens. Reliability of the Persian OES was assessed by measuring intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) for test-retest reliability and Cronbach¡¯s alpha for internal consistency. Spearman¡¯s correlation coefficient was used to test the construct validity. Cronbach¡¯s alpha coefficient was 0.92 showing excellent reliability. Cronbach¡¯s alpha for function, pain, and social-psychological subscales was 0.95, 0.86, and 0.85, respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was 0.85 for the overall questionnaire and 0.90, 0.76, and 0.75 for function, pain, and social-psychological subscales, respectively. Construct validity was confirmed as the Spearman correlation between OES and DASH was 0.80. Persian OES is a valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measure to assess postsurgical elbow status in Persian speaking population. 1. Introduction Clinical outcome measures to evaluate health related quality and function are important in the field of orthopedics [1, 2]. Scoring systems are of two parts that include in one part clinical evaluation and judgment by a skilled observer. The second part is the opinion of patients regarding their health status and this may differ from their physician. Whereas patient satisfaction and well-being are the aim of all therapeutic protocols, relying upon only clinical measures is not enough and so considering the opinion of patients concerning their health status is necessary to standardize medical or surgical decisions [3]. Moreover, another point to consider is that some health status items such as pain or psychosocial characteristics are not completely evaluable by clinical observation. Hence, to compare the efficacy of different treatment protocols with each other, we should put emphasis on joint clinician and patient reported measures, which is why patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) have been introduced [4]. According to a meta-analysis performed by Longo et al., eighteen questionnaires are available to assess the elbow joint and these can be classified into two models [5]. One model is
%U http://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijr/2014/381237/