Italian version of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT-I).

Foot & ankle Pub Date : 2023-05-01 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.4358254
Angela Contri, Francesco Ballardin, G. De Marco, Matteo Gaucci, Angela Scariato, Veronica Zanoni, C. Vanti, P. Pillastrini
{"title":"Italian version of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT-I).","authors":"Angela Contri, Francesco Ballardin, G. De Marco, Matteo Gaucci, Angela Scariato, Veronica Zanoni, C. Vanti, P. Pillastrini","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.4358254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"STUDY DESIGN\nEvaluation of the psychometric properties of a translated, culturally adapted questionnaire.\n\n\nOBJECTIVE\nTranslating, culturally adapting, and validating the Italian version of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT-I).\n\n\nSUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA\nAnkle sprains are one of the most common musculoskeletal injuries and can lead to chronic ankle instability (CAI). The International Ankle Consortium recommends the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT) as a valid and reliable self-report questionnaire assessing the presence and severity of CAI. At this moment, there is no validated Italian version of CAIT.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThe Italian version of the CAIT (CAIT-I) was developed by an expert committee. Test-retest reliability of the CAIT-I was measured in 286 healthy and injured participants within a 4-9-day period, by using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC2,1). Construct validity, exploratory factor analysis, internal consistency and sensitivity were examined in a sample of 548 adults. Instrument responsiveness over 4 time points was determined in a subgroup of 37 participants.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe CAIT-I demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICC≥0.92) and good internal consistency (α = .84). Construct validity was confirmed. Identified cut-off for the presence of CAI was 24.75, with sensitivity= 0.77 and specificity= 0.65. There were significant differences across time for CAIT-I scores (P < .001), demonstrating responsiveness to change, but no floor or ceiling effects.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nThe CAIT-I demonstrates acceptable psychometric performance as a screening and outcome measure. The CAIT-I is a useful tool to assess the presence and severity of CAI.","PeriodicalId":77133,"journal":{"name":"Foot & ankle","volume":"60 1","pages":"102043"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foot & ankle","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4358254","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN Evaluation of the psychometric properties of a translated, culturally adapted questionnaire. OBJECTIVE Translating, culturally adapting, and validating the Italian version of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT-I). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA Ankle sprains are one of the most common musculoskeletal injuries and can lead to chronic ankle instability (CAI). The International Ankle Consortium recommends the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT) as a valid and reliable self-report questionnaire assessing the presence and severity of CAI. At this moment, there is no validated Italian version of CAIT. METHODS The Italian version of the CAIT (CAIT-I) was developed by an expert committee. Test-retest reliability of the CAIT-I was measured in 286 healthy and injured participants within a 4-9-day period, by using Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC2,1). Construct validity, exploratory factor analysis, internal consistency and sensitivity were examined in a sample of 548 adults. Instrument responsiveness over 4 time points was determined in a subgroup of 37 participants. RESULTS The CAIT-I demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability (ICC≥0.92) and good internal consistency (α = .84). Construct validity was confirmed. Identified cut-off for the presence of CAI was 24.75, with sensitivity= 0.77 and specificity= 0.65. There were significant differences across time for CAIT-I scores (P < .001), demonstrating responsiveness to change, but no floor or ceiling effects. CONCLUSION The CAIT-I demonstrates acceptable psychometric performance as a screening and outcome measure. The CAIT-I is a useful tool to assess the presence and severity of CAI.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
意大利版坎伯兰踝关节不稳定工具(CAIT-I)。
研究设计:评估翻译后的文化适应性问卷的心理测量特性。目的翻译、文化适应和验证意大利语版的Cumberland踝关节不稳定工具(CAIT-I)。踝关节扭伤是最常见的肌肉骨骼损伤之一,可导致慢性踝关节不稳定(CAI)。国际踝关节协会推荐使用Cumberland踝关节不稳定工具(CAIT)作为评估CAI存在和严重程度的有效和可靠的自我报告问卷。目前,还没有经过验证的意大利语版CAIT。方法意大利版CAIT (CAIT- i)由专家委员会编制。通过使用类内相关系数(ICC2,1),在4-9天的时间内测量286名健康和受伤参与者的CAIT-I的重测信度。对548名成人样本进行结构效度、探索性因子分析、内部一致性和敏感性检验。在37名参与者的亚组中确定了4个时间点上的仪器反应性。结果CAIT-I具有良好的重测信度(ICC≥0.92)和良好的内部一致性(α = 0.84)。构念效度得到证实。确定CAI存在的截止值为24.75,敏感性= 0.77,特异性= 0.65。CAIT-I评分在不同时间有显著差异(P < 0.001),显示对变化的反应性,但没有下限或上限效应。结论CAIT-I作为一种筛选和结果测量指标具有良好的心理测量性能。CAI - i是评估CAI存在和严重程度的有用工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diabetic foot and lower limb amputations at central, provincial and tertiary hospitals-underscores the need for organised foot health services at primary healthcare level. Italian version of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT-I). Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Cantonese-Chinese Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT-HK). Clinical, radiological, pedobarographic, and quality of life outcomes of the Ponseti treatment for clubfoot: a prospective study. Functional bracing is a safe and cost effective treatment for isolated Weber B fracture.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1