Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Revista Iberoamericana de Cirugía de la Mano 2024; 52(02): e114-e123
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1793950
Artículo Original | Original Article

La versión en español del QuickDASH: Fiabilidad, error de medición, validez de constructo y sensibilidad para la evaluación de resultados en el Síndrome del Túnel Carpiano.

Article in several languages: español | English
Roberto S. Rosales 
1   Unidad de Mano y Microcirugía, GECOT, La Laguna, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, España
,
Hugo Sambad-Rodriguez
1   Unidad de Mano y Microcirugía, GECOT, La Laguna, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, España
,
Carmen Menaya-Fernandez
1   Unidad de Mano y Microcirugía, GECOT, La Laguna, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, España
,
Yolanda Martin-Hidalgo
2   Departamento de Ortopedia, University Hospital of La Candelaria, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, España
,
Luis Reboso-Morales
2   Departamento de Ortopedia, University Hospital of La Candelaria, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, España
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Resumen

Objetivo El propósito de este artículo fue evaluar la confiabilidad, el error de medición, la validez de construcción y la respuesta de la versión española del QuickDASH para la evaluación de resultados en el síndrome del túnel carpiano (STC).

Métodos Una población total de 40 pacientes con diagnóstico de STC completó las versiones en español del QuickDASH, CTS-AL y EQ-5D una semana antes de la cirugía, el día previo a la cirugía y tres meses después de la intervención. La consistencia interna fue analizada mediante el coeficiente α de Cronbach. Para evaluar la concordancia absoluta se utilizaron el coeficiente de correlación intraclase (ICC2,1), el coeficiente de correlación de Lin (CCC) y el límite de acuerdo de Bland y Altman (LoA), mientras que el método no paramétrico de Passing-Bablok (P-B) se empleó para evaluar el sesgo sistemático constante y/o proporcional entre las mediciones. La precisión transversal se analizó con el error estándar de medición (SEM). La precisión longitudinal para el coeficiente de fiabilidad test-retest se analizó con el error estándar de la diferencia de medición (SEMdiff) y el cambio mínimo detectable al 90 % (MDC90) y al 95 % (MDC95) de nivel de confianza. Para evaluar la validez de construcción, se formuló la hipótesis de que el QuickDASH tendría una fuerte correlación positiva con el CTS-AL y una correlación negativa moderada con el índice EQ-5D, utilizando el coeficiente de correlación de Pearson (r) con un nivel de significancia de 0.05.

Resultados El coeficiente de Cronbach fue de 0.912. ICC2,1 y CCC mostraron una concordancia absoluta alta (0.868 y 0.738 respectivamente). La regresión P-B no mostró diferencias constantes y proporcionales significativas entre las dos administraciones del QuickDASH. El QuickDASH mostró una respuesta (ES = 2.1; SRM = 1.97) inferior al CTS-AL (ES = 3.53; SRM = 3.50) y superior al índice EQ-5D (ES = 0.78; SRM = 0.83).

Conclusión La versión española (España) del instrumento QuickDASH presentó buen nivel de confiabilidad, validez de construcción y respuesta para la evaluación de resultados en STC.

Palabras Clave

fiabilidad - validez - validez de construcción - QuickDASH - Síndrome del Túnel Carpiano

Supplementary Material



Publication History

Received: 02 July 2024

Accepted: 11 October 2024

Article published online:
23 December 2024

© 2024. SECMA Foundation. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referencias

  • 1 Beaton DE, Wright JG, Katz JN. Upper Extremity Collaborative Group. Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87 (05) 1038-1046
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Rosales RS, Delgado EB, Díez de la Lastra-Bosch I. Evaluation of the Spanish version of the DASH and carpal tunnel syndrome health-related quality-of-life instruments: cross-cultural adaptation process and reliability. J Hand Surg Am 2002; 27 (02) 334-343
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Rosales RS, Diez de la Lastra I, McCabe S, Ortega Martinez JI, Hidalgo YM. The relative responsiveness and construct validity of the Spanish version of the DASH instrument for outcomes assessment in open carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2009; 34 (01) 72-75
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Kennedy CA, Beaton DE, Solway S, McConnell S, Bombardier C. The DASH and QuickDASH outcome measure user's manual. 3rd ed. Toronto, Ontario:: Institute for Work & Health;; 2011
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 5 Atroshi I, Gummesson C, Johnsson R, Sprinchorn A. Symptoms, disability, and quality of life in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Am 1999; 24 (02) 398-404
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Gay RE, Amadio PC, Johnson JC. Comparative responsiveness of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand, the carpal tunnel questionnaire, and the SF-36 to clinical change after carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Am 2003; 28 (02) 250-254
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Atroshi I, Larsson GU, Ornstein E, Hofer M, Johnsson R, Ranstam J. Outcomes of endoscopic surgery compared with open surgery for carpal tunnel syndrome among employed patients: randomised controlled trial. BMJ 2006; 332 (7556) 1473
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Kimura J. Electrodiagnosis in diseases of nerve and muscle: principles and practice. 2nd ed. Philadelphia:: FA Davis;; 1989
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 9 Amadio PC, Silverstein MD, Ilstrup DM, Schleck CD, Jensen LM. Outcome assessment for carpal tunnel surgery: the relative responsiveness of generic, arthritis-specific, disease-specific, and physical examination measures. J Hand Surg Am 1996; 21 (03) 338-346
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol 2008; 61 (04) 344-349
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Rosales RS, Atroshi I. Spanish versions of the 6-item carpal tunnel syndrome symptoms scale (CTS-6) and palmar pain scale. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2013; 38 (05) 550-551
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Badia X, Roset M, Montserrat S, Herdman M, Segura A. [The Spanish version of EuroQol: a description and its applications. European Quality of Life scale]. Med Clin (Barc) 1999; 112 (Suppl. 01) 79-85
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. Am J Ind Med 1996; 29 (06) 602-608
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Levine DW, Simmons BP, Koris MJ. et al. A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1993; 75 (11) 1585-1592
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Hurst NP, Kind P, Ruta D, Hunter M, Stubbings A. Measuring health-related quality of life in rheumatoid arthritis: validity, responsiveness and reliability of EuroQol (EQ-5D). Br J Rheumatol 1997; 36 (05) 551-559
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Rosales RS, Gutiérrez R, Hidalgo Y, Reboso L, Atroshi I. Cómo escribir un artículo original en Cirugía de la Mano. Rev Iberoam Cir Mano 2016; 44 (01) 47-58
    Thieme ConnectPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Mokkink LB, de Vet HCW, Prinsen CAC. et al. COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist for systematic reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures. Qual Life Res 2018; 27 (05) 1171-1179
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Rosales RS, Atroshi I. The methodological requirements for clinical examination and patient-reported outcomes, and how to test them. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 2020; 45 (01) 12-18
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986; 1 (8476) 307-310
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Kennedy CA, Beaton DE, Solway S, McConnell S, Bombardier C. The DASH and QuickDASH outcome measure user's manual. 3rd ed. Toronto, Ontario:: Institute for Work & Health;; 2011
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 21 Chung MK. Correlation Coefficient. In: Salkin NJ. , Ed. Encyclopedia of Measurement and Statistics. London,: Sage Publications,; 2007: 189-201
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 22 Valderas JM, Kotzeva A, Espallargues M. et al. The impact of measuring patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice: a systematic review of the literature. Qual Life Res 2008; 17 (02) 179-193
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, Ostelo RW, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res 2012; 21 (04) 651-657
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Gabel CP, Michener LA, Melloh M, Burkett B. Modification of the upper limb functional index to a three-point response improves clinimetric properties. J Hand Ther 2010; 23 (01) 41-52
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Alnahdi AH. Validity and reliability of the Arabic quick disabilities of the arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH-Arabic). Musculoskelet Sci Pract 2021; 53: 102372
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 da Silva NC, Chaves TC, Dos Santos JB. et al. Reliability, validity and responsiveness of Brazilian version of QuickDASH. Musculoskelet Sci Pract 2020; 48: 102163
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Hammond A, Prior Y, Tyson S. Linguistic validation, validity and reliability of the British English versions of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire and QuickDASH in people with rheumatoid arthritis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2018; 19 (01) 118
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Schønnemann JO, Eggers J. Validation of the Danish version of the Quick-Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire. Dan Med J 2016; 63 (12) A5306
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Hong SW, Gong HS, Park JW, Roh YH, Baek GH. Validity, Reliability and Responsiveness of the Korean Version of Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire in Patients with Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. J Korean Med Sci 2018; 33 (40) e249
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Stratford PW, Binkley J, Solomon P, Finch E, Gill C, Moreland J. Defining the minimum level of detectable change for the Roland-Morris questionnaire. Phys Ther 1996; 76 (04) 359-365 , discussion 366–368
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Kennedy CA, Beaton DE, Smith P. et al. Measurement properties of the QuickDASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) outcome measure and cross-cultural adaptations of the QuickDASH: a systematic review. Qual Life Res 2013; 22 (09) 2509-2547
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Mintken PE, Glynn P, Cleland JA. Psychometric properties of the shortened disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH) and Numeric Pain Rating Scale in patients with shoulder pain. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2009; 18 (06) 920-926
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Cao S, Zhou R, Zhou H. et al. Reliability and validity of Simplified Chinese version of Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) questionnaire: cross-cultural adaptation and validation. Clin Rheumatol 2019; 38 (11) 3281-3287
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Franchignoni F, Ferriero G, Giordano A, Sartorio F, Vercelli S, Brigatti E. Psychometric properties of QuickDASH - a classical test theory and Rasch analysis study. Man Ther 2011; 16 (02) 177-182
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar