Abstract: Studies shows that 1%-2% of world population will develop chronic skin wound in their lifetime. Nowadays, the patient report outcome measure (PROM) questionnaires are used to evaluate the patient's quality of life. However, several PROM's questionnaires analyse specific chronic wounds. In this sense, WOUND-Q toll was designed to evaluate all types of wounds. Because of the WOUND-Q wide applicability, the use of WOUND-Q is helpful for other countries. This study aimed to translate and adapt WOUND-Q tool for Brazilian Portuguese language. Two independent translators translated the WOUND-Q questionnaire from English to Brazilian Portuguese. Then these translators build Version 1 (T1) and version 2 (T2). In a consensus meeting, a third senior author defined the final version. In the back translation process, an English proficient translator translated the Brazilian Portuguese version to the original version. After another consensus, a final version was defined. Then, our group performed a cognitive test to validate this version. After the first translation, the comparison of version T1 and T2 achieved an intraclass correlation coefficient of 77%. The back translation showed the need of few adjustments. For the cognitive test, the mean age was 44.1 ± 9.3 years. Only one question was changed to improve comprehensiveness. In the review phase, few adjustments were performed to the final Brazilian Portuguese version, mostly regarding verbal tense and prepositions. In conclusion, this study successfully translated and adapted the WOUND-Q questionnaire for a Brazilian Portuguese version.
(© 2024 The Wound Healing Society.)
References: Järbrink K, Ni G, Sönnergren H, et al. Prevalence and incidence of chronic wounds and related complications: a protocol for a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):152.
Kuhnke JL, Keast D, Rosenthal S, Evans RJ. Health professionals' perspectives on delivering patient‐focused wound management: a qualitative study. J Wound Care. 2019;28(7):S4‐S13.
Tomas N, Mandume AM. Nurses' barriers to the pressure ulcer risk assessment scales implementation: a phenomenological study. Nurs Open. 2024;11(1):e2079.
Kontodimopoulos N, Veniou A, Tentolouris N, Niakas D. Validity and reliability of the Greek version of the diabetic foot ulcer scale–short form (DFS‐SF). Hormones (Athens). 2016;15(3):394‐403.
Sommer R, Augustin M, Hampel‐Kalthoff C, Blome C. The wound‐QoL questionnaire on quality of life in chronic wounds is highly reliable. Wound Repair Regen. 2017;25(4):730‐732.
Klassen A, van Haren EL, Cross K, et al. International mixed methods study protocol to develop a patient‐reported outcome measure for all types of chronic wounds (the WOUND‐Q). BMJ Open. 2020;10(3):e032332.
Klassen AF, van Haren ELWG, van Alphen TC, et al. International study to develop the WOUND‐Q patient‐reported outcome measure for all types of chronic wounds. Int Wound J. 2021;18(4):487‐509.
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.
Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient‐reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value Health. 2005;8:94‐104.
Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting Intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155‐163.
Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice. 3rd ed. Pearson/Prentice Hall; 2009.
Messner W, Payson SE. Variation in COVID‐19 outbreaks at the US state and county levels. Public Health. 2020;187:15‐18.
Kalfoss M. Translation and adaption of questionnaires: a nursing challenge. SAGE Open Nurs. 2019;23(5):18816810.
Processing Request
No Comments.