oru.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Translation and linguistic validation of the Swedish version of Orthotics and prosthetics users’ survey
Örebro University, School of Health and Medical Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6410-2474
Örebro University, School of Health and Medical Sciences.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4247-2236
2008 (English)Conference paper, Oral presentation only (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

There is a lack of Swedish instruments assessing outcome of orthotic and prosthetic services. The North American derived Orthotics and Prosthetics Users’ Survey (OPUS) consists of five questionnaires assessing common rehabilitation goals. It was translated to Swedish and validated linguistically. Thirty-nine persons answered the questionnaires and were systematically debriefed. In most cases the items were understood as intended. Words and expressions were changed if misunderstood or interpreted in different ways. The resulting Swedish version of OPUS showed acceptable linguistic validity. A study on construct validity and test-retest reliability is in process.

 

1      Introduction

Historically, Orthotic and Prosthetic (O&P) services in Sweden have been based on hands-on experience rather than science. Self-report instruments could be used to systematically evaluate the practice, but most of them are developed in English speaking countries and cannot be used in Sweden without translation and validation. Moreover, the only instruments available in Swedish are limited to the smaller group in O&P practice, namely prosthetic clients.

 

The Orthotics and Prosthetics Users´ Survey (OPUS) was developed and validated in the USA to assess the outcome in both prosthetic and orthotic users [1]. The OPUS consists of five questionnaires assessing i) health related quality of life, ii) satisfaction with device, iii) satisfaction with services, iv) upper extremity function, and v) lower extremity function. If translated, OPUS could be a useful tool for studying the outcome of O&P services in Sweden. Still, validity problems can arise by using direct translations. Therefore, translations’ validity must be tested in the new cultural context.

 

The aim was to translate OPUS to Swedish and test the linguistic validity in a Swedish context.

 

2      Methods and subjects

2.1. Methods

A modified version of the translation process suggested by the WHO [2] was used. Four medical professionals (P/O, OT, PT, orthopaedic surgeon) independently translated OPUS to Swedish. The translations were merged to a single document by one of the authors (GJ). Translators and authors met twice to discuss the translations and a consensus version was created. A professional translator performed a back-translation to English. The English original, the Swedish consensus version, and the back-translation, were compared by one of the authors (GJ) and a new Swedish version was created.

 

One intention with the Swedish version of OPUS was to use it for evaluation of insoles. However, many of these clients are relatively fit and a high ceiling effect could be expected in the lower extremity function part of OPUS. Therefore, eight new items assumed to be more difficult were added to the Swedish version of this particular questionnaire.

 

Linguistic validation was performed by systematically debriefing the clients who answered the five questionnaires. Ten subjects answered each questionnaire (each subject completed one or two different questionnaires).

 

2.2. Subjects

Thirty-nine clients (27 women, 12 men, mean age 59,8) at the Department of Prosthetics and Orthotics, Örebro University Hospital, participated. Clients younger than 18 years, and clients unable to understand written Swedish, were excluded. The study was approved by the Regional Ethics Committee review board.

 

3      Results

Minor linguistic changes were made during the translation process. Most items were understood as intended but some words and expressions were changed because of misunderstandings or cultural differences between Sweden and the USA.

 

4      Discussion

The translation procedure used is well established and has been used in several studies. The quality of the translation was improved by involving people of different professions and experiences.

 

5      Conclusion

The translation and validation resulted in a Swedish version of OPUS that may be a reliable and useful contribution to outcome studies in Swedish O&P service. A study assessing construct validity and test-retest reliability is in process and preliminary results will be presented.

 

6      References

1.      Heinemann AW, Bode RK, et al. (2003). "Development and measurement properties of the Orthotics and Prosthetics Users' Survey (OPUS): a comprehensive set of clinical outcome instruments." Prosthet Orthot Int 27;3:191-206

 

2.      WHO (2007). "Process of translation and adaptation of instruments."  2007: http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/.

 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2008.
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Research subject
Medicine
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-26655OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-26655DiVA, id: diva2:576207
Conference
5th Regional Central European ISPO Conference, Portorož, Slovenien, 19-21 sept 2008
Available from: 2012-12-12 Created: 2012-12-12 Last updated: 2019-03-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Authority records BETA

Jarl, Gustav M.Norling Hermansson, Liselotte

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Jarl, Gustav M.Norling Hermansson, Liselotte
By organisation
School of Health and Medical Sciences
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 470 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf