Current issue
Archive
About the Journal
About us
Aims and Scope
Indexing and Abstracting
Editorial Office
Open Access Policy
Publication Ethics
Contact
For Authors
Editorial Policy
Peer Review Policy
Manuscript Preparation Guidelines
Copyright & Licensing
Publication Fees
Fast-Track Paper Publication Option
Conflict Interest Guidance
Submit an Article
Special Issues
News & Editorials
“Fake,” “Predatory,” and “Pseudo” Journals: Charlatans Threatening Trust in Science
Shifting the Journal submission-review system to the Editorial System Manuscript December 27, 2017.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form
1
Department of Physical Therapy, King Abdullah Medical Complex, Jeddah, SAUDI ARABIA
2
Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Medical Rehabilitation Sciences, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, SAUDI ARABIA
Publication date: 2024-12-11
Electron J Gen Med 2024;21(6):em615
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Background:
The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form is a widely used measure to assess symptoms, functional impairments, and sport activity limitations related to knee conditions.
Objectives:
This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the IKDC (IKDC-AR) in patients experiencing knee pain.
Methods:
The IKDC-AR was compared to the short form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire, and the visual analog scale (VAS) using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient to evaluate construct validity. Internal consistency was examined using Cronbach’s alpha, while test-retest reliability was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1). Measurement precision was quantified through the standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC).
Results:
Strong correlations were observed between the IKDC-AR and SF-36 subscales reflecting similar constructs, including physical component summary and physical function (r = 0.71 and r =0.74, respectively). A moderate negative correlation with the VAS (r = -0.65) further supported construct validity. Divergent validity was confirmed by weak correlations with SF-36 subscales for the mental component summary and mental health (r =0.17 and r =0.18, respectively). The IKDC-AR demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92) and high test-retest reliability (ICC2,1 = 0.95). Measurement precisions was highlighted with a SEM of 3.95 and MDC of 10.95.
Conclusion:
The IKDC-AR is a reliable and valid tool for evaluating knee function and symptoms in Arabic-speaking patients with knee pain. Its strong psychometric properties make it suitable for both clinical and research applications.
The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form is a widely used measure to assess symptoms, functional impairments, and sport activity limitations related to knee conditions.
Objectives:
This study aimed to assess the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the IKDC (IKDC-AR) in patients experiencing knee pain.
Methods:
The IKDC-AR was compared to the short form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire, and the visual analog scale (VAS) using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient to evaluate construct validity. Internal consistency was examined using Cronbach’s alpha, while test-retest reliability was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1). Measurement precision was quantified through the standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC).
Results:
Strong correlations were observed between the IKDC-AR and SF-36 subscales reflecting similar constructs, including physical component summary and physical function (r = 0.71 and r =0.74, respectively). A moderate negative correlation with the VAS (r = -0.65) further supported construct validity. Divergent validity was confirmed by weak correlations with SF-36 subscales for the mental component summary and mental health (r =0.17 and r =0.18, respectively). The IKDC-AR demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.92) and high test-retest reliability (ICC2,1 = 0.95). Measurement precisions was highlighted with a SEM of 3.95 and MDC of 10.95.
Conclusion:
The IKDC-AR is a reliable and valid tool for evaluating knee function and symptoms in Arabic-speaking patients with knee pain. Its strong psychometric properties make it suitable for both clinical and research applications.
REFERENCES (35)
1.
Neeb TB, Aufdemkampe G, Wagener JH, Mastenbroek L. Assessing anterior cruciate ligament injuries: The association and differential value of questionnaires, clinical tests, and functional tests. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 1997;26(6):324-31. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.... PMid:9402569.
2.
Sernert N, Kartus J, Köhler K, et al. Analysis of subjective, objective and functional examination tests after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction. A follow-up of 527 patients. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 1999;7(3):160-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167... PMid:10401652.
3.
Wang D, Jones MH, Khair MM, Miniaci A. Patient-reported outcome measures for the knee. J Knee Surg. 2010;23(3):137-51. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030... PMid:21329255.
4.
Dawson J, Doll H, Fitzpatrick R, Jenkinson C, Carr AJ. The routine use of patient reported outcome measures in healthcare settings. BMJ. 2010;340:c186. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c1... PMid:20083546.
5.
Weldring T, Smith SMS. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Health Serv Insights. 2013;6:61-8. https://doi.org/10.4137/HSI.S1... PMid:25114561 PMCid:PMC4089835.
6.
Azar FM, Calandruccio JH, Grear BJ, et al. Orthobiologics, an issue of orthopedic clinics. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocl.....
7.
Kyte DG, Calvert M, van der Wees PJ, ten Hove R, Tolan S, Hill JC. An introduction to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in physiotherapy. Physiotherapy. 2015;101(2):119-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phys... PMid:25620440.
8.
Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL, et al. Development and validation of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med. 2001;29(5):600-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/036354... PMid:11573919.
9.
Almalki H, Herrington L, Jones R. Arabic version of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form (IKDC): Translation and validation. J Back Musculoskelet Rehab. 2022;35(3):659-65. https://doi.org/10.3233/BMR-21... PMid:34657874.
10.
Ware JE, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36): I. conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30(6):473-83. https://doi.org/10.1097/000056... PMid:1593914.
11.
Coons SJ, Alabdulmohsin SA, Draugalis JR, Hays RD. Reliability of an Arabic version of the RAND-36 health survey and its equivalence to the US-English version. Med Care. 1998;36(3):428-32. https://doi.org/10.1097/000056... PMid:9520966.
12.
Flandry F, Hunt JP, Terry GC, Hughston JC. Analysis of subjective knee complaints using visual analog scales. Am J Sports Med. 1991;19(2):112-8. https://doi.org/10.1177/036354... PMid:2039061.
13.
Anthoine E, Moret L, Regnault A, Sébille V, Hardouin JB. Sample size used to validate a scale: A review of publications on newly-developed patient reported outcomes measures. Health Quality Life Outcomes. 2014;12:176. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955... PMid:25492701 PMCid:PMC4275948.
14.
Thorndike RM. Book review : Psychometric theory (3rd ed.) by Jum Nunnally and Ira Bernstein New York: McGraw-Hill, 1994, xxiv + 752 pp. Appl Psychol Meas. 1995;19(3):303-5. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662....
15.
Weir JP. Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res. 2005;19(1):231-40. https://doi.org/10.1519/001242... PMid:15705040.
16.
Atkinson G, Nevill AM. Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. Sports Med. 1998;26(4):217-38. https://doi.org/10.2165/000072... PMid:9820922.
17.
Kane R. Understanding health care outcomes research. Burlington (MA): Jones & Bartlett Learning; 2006.
18.
Fitzpatrick R, Davey C, Buxton MJ, Jones DR. Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. Health Technol Assess. 1998;2(14):i-iv, 1-74. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta214....
19.
Padua R, Bondì R, Ceccarelli E, et al. Italian version of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form: Cross-cultural adaptation and validation. Arthroscopy. 2004;20(8):819-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-... PMid:15483542.
20.
Haverkamp D, Sierevelt IN, Breugem SJM, Lohuis K, Blankevoort L, van Dijk CN. Translation and validation of the Dutch version of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34(10):1680-84. https://doi.org/10.1177/036354... PMid:16816150.
21.
Crawford K, Briggs KK, Rodkey WG, Steadman JR. Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the IKDC score for meniscus injuries of the knee. Arthroscopy. 2007; 23(8):839-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth... PMid:17681205.
22.
Lertwanich P, Praphruetkit T, Keyurapan E, Lamsam C, Kulthanan T. Validity and reliability of Thai version of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. 2008;91(8):8.
23.
Greco NJ, Anderson AF, Mann BJ, et al. Responsiveness of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form in comparison to the Western Ontario and McMaster universities osteoarthritis index, modified Cincinnati knee rating system, and short form 36 in patients with focal articular cartilage defects. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(5):891-902. https://doi.org/10.1177/036354... PMid:20044494.
24.
Metsavaht L, Leporace G, Riberto M, de Mello Sposito MM, Batista LA. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Brazilian version of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form: Validity and reproducibility. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(9):1894-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/036354... PMid:20472755.
25.
Fu SN, Chan YH. Translation and validation of Chinese version of International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33(13-14):1186-9. https://doi.org/10.3109/096382... PMid:20969433.
26.
Kim JG, Ha JK, Lee JY, Seo SS, Choi CH, Lee MC. Translation and validation of the Korean version of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form. Knee Surg Relat Res. 2013;25(3):106-11. https://doi.org/10.5792/ksrr.2... PMid:24032098 PMCid:PMC3767895.
27.
Çelik D, Coşkunsu D, KiliÇoğlu Ö, Ergönül Ö, Irrgang JJ. Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the International Knee Documentation Committee subjective knee form into Turkish. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2014;44(11):899-909. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.... PMid:25323139.
28.
Tigerstrand Grevnerts H, Grävare Silbernagel K, Sonesson S, et al. Translation and testing of measurement properties of the Swedish version of the IKDC subjective knee form. Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2017;27(5):554-62. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12... PMid:28207954.
29.
Todor A, Vermesan D, Haragus H, Patrascu Jr JM, Timar B, Cosma DI. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Romanian International Knee Documentation Committee–Subjective knee form. PeerJ. 2020;8:e8448. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.... PMid:32117610 PMCid:PMC7003694.
30.
Wright RW. Knee injury outcomes measures. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009;17(1):31-9. https://doi.org/10.5435/001246... PMid:19136425.
31.
Al-Arfaj A, Al-Boukai AA. Prevalence of radiographic knee osteoarthritis in Saudi Arabia. Clin Rheumatol. 2002; 21(2):142-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10067... PMid:12086165.
32.
Srikanth VK, Fryer JL, Zhai G, Winzenberg TM, Hosmer D, Jones G. A meta-analysis of sex differences prevalence, incidence and severity of osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2005;13(9):769-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joca... PMid:15978850.
33.
Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D, et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis: Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Arthritis Rheumatism. 1986;29(8):1039-49. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.17... PMid:3741515.
34.
Laucis NC, Hays RD, Bhattacharyya T. Scoring the SF-36 in orthopaedics: A brief guide. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(19):1628. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.O... PMid:26446970 PMCid:PMC5029523.
35.
Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcli... PMid:17161752.
| eISSN: | 2516-3507 |
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
