Cross cultural adaptation and refinement of an English version of a Dutch patient-reported questionnaire for hand sensitivity: The Radboud Evaluation of Sensitivity
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Longitudinal clinical measurement. INTRODUCTION: Sensory alterations in the hand can present as both decreased sensation or numbness, and hyperesthesia, including mechanical allodynia and cold intolerance. However, few patient-reported outcomes have been developed and validated for evaluation, particularly for increased sensitivity. The Radboud Evaluation of Sensitivity was developed in the Netherlands for patient-reported evaluation of hand sensitivity in complex regional pain syndrome. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: The purpose of this study was to translate into English and culturally validate the Radboud Evaluation of Sensitivity for the North American context. METHODS: Forward and backward translation, followed by a psychometric evaluation of the synthesized version of the translated tool, was undertaken in a heterogeneous group of persons after hand injury, including nerve injuries, hand trauma, and complex regional pain syndrome. RESULTS: Thirty-six persons completed test-retest reliability testing, yielding an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.96) for single measures. Internal consistency was also high at α = 0.96 in a larger sample (n = 56). Although some support for construct validity was generated, several validity hypotheses were not confirmed. Of interest, there appeared to be significant differences in the scores between persons with hypoesthesia as compared with those with hyperesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: The Radboud Evaluation of Sensitivity, English version appears to be a reliable tool for the self-reported evaluation of sensory alterations in the hand, including both hypoesthesia and hyperesthesia. More research is needed to add to the extent of and confidence in the validity and responsiveness of this assessment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.
