Validation of Czech versions of questionnaires assessing fatigue and physical acti- vity in patients with rheumatic diseases: Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS), Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue Scale (MAF), Human Activity Profile (HAP)
Authors:
B. Heřmánková 1; H. Šmucrová 2; M. Mikulášová 2; S. Oreská 2,3; M. Špiritović 1,2; H. Štorkánová 2,3; R. Bečvář 2,3; J. Vencovský 2,3; H. Mann 2,3; M. Tomčík 2,3
Authors‘ workplace:
Fakulta tělesné výchovy a sportu, Katedra fyzioterapie, Univerzita Karlova, Praha
1; Revmatologický ústav Praha
2; Revmatologická klinika 1. lékařské fakulty, Univerzita Karlova, Praha
3
Published in:
Čes. Revmatol., 28, 2020, No. 3, p. 132-151.
Category:
Original article
Overview
Patient-Reported Outcomes are essential tools used in the clinical evaluation of the patient’s subjective difficulties, such as fatigue or physical disability. Physical disability is a significant cause of reduced quality of life in patients with rheumatic diseases. Fatigue is present in more than half of this population. The aim of this work was to perform the Czech translation and linguistic validation of questionnaires evaluating fatigue (Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue Scale, MAF; Fatigue Impact Scale, FIS) and physical activity (Human Activity Profile, HAP). The original versions of the questionnaires were translated by three independent bilingual rheumatologists and consensually discussed and synthesized by the authors of this paper. In the next step, six bilingual non-physicians commented on the linguistic and content aspects of the questionnaires, and their comments were taken into account by an expert panel. Subsequently, two independent blinded translators carried out a back-translation. Consensually, pre-final Czech versions of the questionnaires were created, which were afterward completed by 50 patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) and 55 patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). A feedback questionnaire was used to assess the comprehensibility and conciseness of each question. The expert panel took into consideration the patient’s comments when creating the definitive Czech versions of the questionnaires. This work has resulted in the Czech versions of the FIS, MAF, and HAP questionnaires. All questionnaires proved to be understandable. Patients with IIM and SSc achieved scores that were numerically similar to the results of previously published studies. These questionnaires may be appropriate tools to be used in clinical research and routine clinical practice.
Keywords:
Patient-Reported Outcomes – Fatigue Impact Scale – Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue Scale – Human Activity Profile – linguistic validation
Sources
1. Anyfanti P, Triantafyllou A, Panagopoulos P, Triantafyllou G, Pyrpasopoulou A, Chatzimichailidou S, et al. Predictors of impaired quality of life in patients with rheumatic diseases. Clin Rheumatol 2016; 35(7): 1705–1711.
2. Fausto S, di Carlo Marco CM, Sonia F, Alessandro C, Marwin G. The impact of different rheumatic diseases on health-related quality of life: a comparison with a selected sample of healthy individuals using SF-36 questionnaire, EQ-5D and SF-6D utility values. Acta Biomed: Atenei Parmensis 2018; 89(4): 541.
3. Overman CL, Kool MB, da Silva JA, Geenen R. The prevalence of severe fatigue in rheumatic diseases: an international study. Clin Rheumatol 2016; 35(2): 409–415.
4. Stebbings S, Treharne GJ. Fatigue in rheumatic disease: an overview. Int J Clin Rheumatol 2010; 5(4): 487.
5. Hjollund NH, Andersen JH, Bech P. Assessment of fatigue in chronic disease: a bibliographic study of fatigue measurement scales. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2007; 5(1): 12.
6. Whitehead L. The measurement of fatigue in chronic illness: a systematic review of unidimensional and multidimensional fatigue measures. J Pain Symptom Manage 2009; 37(1): 107–128.
7. Öncü J, Başoğlu F, Kuran B. A comparison of impact of fatigue on cognitive, physical, and psychosocial status in patients with fibromyal-gia and rheumatoid arthritis. Rheumatol Int 2013; 33(12): 3031–3037.
8. Piper BF, Dibble SL, Dodd MJ, Weiss MC, Slaughter RE, Paul SM. (eds.) The revised Piper Fatigue Scale: psychometric evaluation in women with breast cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 1998: Oncology Nursing Society.
9. Belza B. Comparison of self-reported fatigue in rheumatoid arthritis and controls. J Rheumatol 1995; 22(4): 639–643.
10. Hewlett S, Dures E, Almeida C. Measures of fatigue: Bristol rheumatoid arthritis fatigue multi dimensional questionnaire (braf mdq), bristol rheumatoid arthritis fatigue numerical rating scales (braf nrs) for severity, effect, and coping, chalder fatigue questionnaire (cfq), checklist individual strength (cis20r and cis8r), fatigue severity scale (fss), functional assessment chronic illness therapy (fatigue) (facit f), multi dimensional assessment of fatigue (maf), multi dimensional fatigue inventory (mfi), pediatric quality of life (pedsql) multi dimensional fatigue scale, profile of fatigue (prof), short form 36 vitality subscale (sf 36 vt), and visual analog scales (vas). Arthritis Care Res 2011; 63(S11): S63–S86.
11. Belza B, Miyawaki CE, Liu M, Aree-Ue S, Fessel M, Minott KR, et al. A systematic review of studies using the Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue scale. J Nurs Meas 2018; 26(1): 36–74.
12. Sandqvist G, Archenholtz B, Scheja A, Hesselstrand R. The Swedish version of the Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue (MAF) in systemic sclerosis: reproducibility and correlations to other fatigue instruments. Scand J Rheumatol 2011; 40(6): 493–494.
13. Yacoub YI, Amine B, Bensabbah R, Hajjaj-Hassouni N. Assessment of fatigue and its relationships with disease-related parameters in patients with systemic sclerosis. Clin Rheumatol 2012; 31(4): 655–660.
14. Cross M, Lapsley H, Barcenilla A, Brooks P, March L. Association between measures of fatigue and health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis. Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research 2008; 1(2): 97–104.
15. Wolfe F. Fatigue assessments in rheumatoid arthritis: comparative performance of visual analog scales and longer fatigue questionnaires in 7760 patients. J Rheumatol 2004; 31(10): 1896–1902.
16. Fisk JD, Ritvo PG, Ross L, Haase DA, Marrie TJ, Schlech WF. Measuring the functional impact of fatigue: initial validation of the fatigue impact scale. Clin Infect Dis 1994; 18(Suppl 1): S79–S83.
17. Lundgren-Nilsson Å, Tennant A, Jakobsson S, Simrén M, Taft C, Dencker A. Validation of Fatigue Impact Scale with various item sets – a Rasch analysis. Disabil Rehab 2019; 41(7): 840–846.
18. Fisk JD, Doble SE. Construction and validation of a fatigue impact scale for daily administration (D-FIS). Qual Life Res 2002; 11(3): 263–272.
19. Davidson M, de Morton N. A systematic review of the Human Activity Profile. Clin Rehabil 2007; 21(2): 151–162.
20. Johansen KL, Painter P, Kent-Braun JA, Ng AV, Carey S, Da Silva M, et al. Validation of questionnaires to estimate physical activity and functioning in end-stage renal disease. Kidney Int 2001; 59(3): 1121–1127.
21. Bilek LD, Venema DM, Camp KL, Lyden ER, Meza JL. Evaluation of the human activity profile for use with persons with arthritis. Arthritis Care Res 2005; 53(5): 756–763.
22. Bennell KL, Hinman RS, Crossley KM, Metcalf BR, Buchhinder R, Green S, et al. Is the Human Activity Profile a useful measure in people with knee osteoarthritis? J Rehabil Res Dev 2004; 41(4).
23. Gerber L, El-Gabalawy H, Arayssi T, Furst G, Yarboro C, Schu-macher HR. Polyarticular arthritis, independent of rheumatoid factor, is associated with poor functional outcome in recent onset inflammatory synovitis. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil 2000; 14(3): 105–159.
24. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000; 25(24): 3186–3191.
25. van Den Hoogen F, Khanna D, Fransen J, Johnson SR, Baron M, Tyndall A, et al. 2013 classification criteria for systemic sclerosis: an American College of Rheumatology/European League against Rheumatism collaborative initiative. Arthritis Rheum 2013; 65(11): 2737–2747.
26. Bohan A, Peter JB. Polymyositis and dermatomyositis (first of two parts). N Engl J Med 1975; 292: 344–347.
27. Hoogendijk JE, Amato AA, Lecky BR, Choy EH, Lundberg IE, Rose MR, et al. 119th ENMC international workshop: trial design in adult idiopathic inflammatory myopathies, with the exception of inclusion body myositis, 10–12 October 2003, Naarden, The Netherlands. Neuromuscul Disord 2004; 14(5): 337–345.
28. Leclair V, Regardt M, Wojcik S, Hudson M, Study CIM. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in idiopathic inflammatory myopathy: a systematic review. PloS One 2016; 11(8): e0160753.
29. Buck U, Poole J, Mendelson C. Factors related to self efficacy in persons with scleroderma. Musculoskeletal Care 2010; 8(4): 197–203.
30. Kevser G, Cengiz G, Kemal E, Özgöçmen S. The Turkish Version of Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue and Fatigue Severity Scale is reproducible and correlated with other outcome measures in patients with systemic sclerosis. Arch Rheumatol 2016; 31(4): 329.
31. Gerber L, Furst G, Yarboro C, El-Gabalawy H. Number of active joints, not diagnosis, is the primary determinant of function and performance in early synovitis. Clin Exp Rheumatol 2003; 21(5, Suppl 31): S65–S70.
Labels
Dermatology & STDs Paediatric rheumatology RheumatologyArticle was published in
Czech Rheumatology
2020 Issue 3
Most read in this issue
- Current impact of seronegative rheumatoid arthritis
- The role of viruses in the development of autoimmune diseases
- Validation of Czech versions of questionnaires assessing fatigue and physical acti- vity in patients with rheumatic diseases: Fatigue Impact Scale (FIS), Multidimensional Assessment of Fatigue Scale (MAF), Human Activity Profile (HAP)
- Diet in gout – should we reduce the intake of purines?