PDF herunterladen
Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol
DOI: 10.1055/a-2543-7748
Original Research

Linguistic Validation and Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Canine Orthopedic Index for the German- and Spanish-speaking Population

Heidi Radke
1   Department of Small Animal Surgery, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
,
Pilar Lafuente
2   Universidad Internacional de La Rioja, La Rioja, Spain
,
Natalia Andrea Reyes Rodriguez
3   Universidad de Ciencias Aplicadas y Ambientales U.C.D.A., Bogotá, Colombia
,
Chiara Cianciolo
4   Department of Clinical Science, AO Innovation Translation Center, AO Foundation, Davos, Switzerland
,
Paul Cella
5   FACITtrans, Ponte Vedra, Florida, United States
,
Alexander Joeris
4   Department of Clinical Science, AO Innovation Translation Center, AO Foundation, Davos, Switzerland
› Institutsangaben
Funding This work was supported by AO VET.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Objective

The Canine Orthopedic Index (COI) questionnaire was developed to assess chronic pain and functional impairment in dogs with orthopaedic conditions. This study aimed to perform a linguistic validation and cross-cultural adaptation of the COI from the original English version into Universal German and Universal Spanish.

Methods

We employed the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy translation methodology, which involves two forward translations, one reconciliation of the two forward translations, a back translation into English, multiple reviews, and cognitive debriefing interviews with a representative sample of dog carers. We followed a universal approach to translation, with translators and study participants from different German- and Spanish-speaking countries.

Results

The two independent forward translations differed by four parts for the German COI and eight parts for the Spanish COI. Comparing the backward translations with the original document identified 10 items or instructions in both translations that required retranslation. Cognitive debriefing interviews with dog carers confirmed that the translated instruments effectively conveyed the same concepts as the original version, leading to no further changes in the Universal German COI and four minor revisions to the Universal Spanish COI.

Conclusion

We provide linguistically validated and culturally adapted versions of the COI suitable for use in all German- and Spanish-speaking countries.

Keywords

observer-reported outcome measures - translation - linguistic validation - canine - orthopaedic

Authors' Contribution

H.R. contributed to the conception of the study, study design, data acquisition, data analysis and interpretation, original draft writing, and reviewing and editing. N.A.R.R. and P.L. contributed to the data acquisition, data analysis and interpretation, and reviewing and editing. C.C. contributed to the original draft writing, and reviewing and editing. P.C. contributed to study design, data analysis and interpretation, as well as reviewing and editing. A.J. contributed to the conception of the study, and study design and reviewed and approved the final manuscript.


Supplementary Material



Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 14. November 2024

Angenommen: 21. Februar 2025

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
12. Mai 2025

© 2025. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Oswald-Hesse-Straße 50, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Clark N, Comerford E. An update on mobility assessment of dogs with musculoskeletal disease. J Small Anim Pract 2023; 64 (10) 599-610
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 2 Anderson KL, Zulch H, O'Neill DG, Meeson RL, Collins LM. Risk factors for canine osteoarthritis and its predisposing arthropathies: a systematic review. Front Vet Sci 2020; 7: 220
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 3 Mele E. Epidemiology of osteoarthritis. Vet Focus 2007; 17: 4-10
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 4 Pantaleon L. Why measuring outcomes is important in health care. J Vet Intern Med 2019; 33 (02) 356-362
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 5 Belshaw Z, Dean R, Asher L. “You can be blind because of loving them so much”: the impact on owners in the United Kingdom of living with a dog with osteoarthritis. BMC Vet Res 2020; 16 (01) 190
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 6 Belshaw Z, Dean R, Asher L. Slower, shorter, sadder: a qualitative study exploring how dog walks change when the canine participant develops osteoarthritis. BMC Vet Res 2020; 16 (01) 85
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 7 Walton MB, Cowderoy E, Lascelles D, Innes JF. Evaluation of construct and criterion validity for the ‘Liverpool Osteoarthritis in Dogs’ (LOAD) clinical metrology instrument and comparison to two other instruments. PLoS One 2013; 8 (03) e58125
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 8 Belshaw Z, Asher L, Dean RS. Systematic review of outcome measures reported in clinical canine osteoarthritis research. Vet Surg 2016; 45 (04) 480-487
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 9 Pinna S, Lambertini C, Grassato L, Romagnoli N. Evidence-based veterinary medicine: a tool for evaluating the healing process after surgical treatment for cranial cruciate ligament rupture in dogs. Front Vet Sci 2019; 6: 65
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 10 Innes JF, Morton MA, Lascelles BDX. Minimal clinically-important differences for the ‘Liverpool Osteoarthritis in Dogs’ (LOAD) and the ‘Canine Orthopedic Index’ (COI) client-reported outcomes measures. PLoS One 2023; 18 (02) e0280912
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 11 Radke H, Joeris A, Chen M. Evidence-based evaluation of owner-reported outcome measures for canine orthopedic care - a COSMIN evaluation of 6 instruments. Vet Surg 2022; 51 (02) 244-253
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 12 Brown DC. The Canine Orthopedic Index. Step 1: Devising the items. Vet Surg 2014; 43 (03) 232-240
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 13 Brown DC. The Canine Orthopedic Index. Step 2: Psychometric testing. Vet Surg 2014; 43 (03) 241-246
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 14 Brown DC. The Canine Orthopedic Index. Step 3: Responsiveness testing. Vet Surg 2014; 43 (03) 247-254
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 15 Andersson A, Bergström A. Adaptation of the Canine Orthopaedic Index to evaluate chronic elbow osteoarthritis in Swedish dogs. Acta Vet Scand 2019; 61 (01) 29
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 16 Engdahl K, Bergström A, Höglund O, Moldal ER, Emanuelson U, Boge GS. Long-term outcome in dogs with cranial cruciate ligament disease evaluated using the canine orthopaedic index. Vet Rec 2023; 193 (12) e3172
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 17 Moore EV, Weeren R, Paek M. Extended long-term radiographic and functional comparison of tibial plateau leveling osteotomy vs tibial tuberosity advancement for cranial cruciate ligament rupture in the dog. Vet Surg 2020; 49 (01) 146-154
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 18 Alves JC, Innes JF. Minimal clinically-important differences for the “Liverpool Osteoarthritis in Dogs” (LOAD) and the “Canine Orthopedic Index” (COI) in dogs with osteoarthritis. PLoS One 2023; 18 (09) e0291881
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 19 Wild D, Grove A, Martin M. et al; ISPOR Task Force for Translation and Cultural Adaptation. 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 (02) 94-104
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 20 Eremenco S, Pease S, Mann S, Berry P. PRO Consortium's Process Subcommittee. Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Consortium translation process: consensus development of updated best practices. J Patient Rep Outcomes 2017; 2 (01) 12
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 21 McKown S, Acquadro C, Anfray C. et al. Good practices for the translation, cultural adaptation, and linguistic validation of clinician-reported outcome, observer-reported outcome, and performance outcome measures. J Patient Rep Outcomes 2020; 4 (01) 89
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 22 Alves JC. Initial psychometric evaluation of the Portuguese version of the Canine Orthopedic Index. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2023; 36 (05) 236-240
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 23 Alves JCA, Jorge PIF, Dos Santos AMMP. A survey on the orthopedic and functional assessment in a Portuguese population of police working dogs. BMC Vet Res 2022; 18 (01) 116
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 24 Eremenco SL, Cella D, Arnold BJ. A comprehensive method for the translation and cross-cultural validation of health status questionnaires. Eval Health Prof 2005; 28 (02) 212-232
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 25 Bonomi AE, Cella DF, Hahn EA. et al. Multilingual translation of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) quality of life measurement system. Qual Life Res 1996; 5 (03) 309-320
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 26 Lent L, Hahn E, Eremenco S, Webster K, Cella D. Using cross-cultural input to adapt the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) scales. Acta Oncol 1999; 38 (06) 695-702
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 27 American Veterinary Medical Association. AVMA Pet Ownership and Demographics Sourcebook: 2017–2018 edition. 2018
    PubMed
  • 28 Landau RE, Beck A, Glickman LT, Litster A, Widmar NJ, Moore GE. Preparedness of small animal veterinary practices to communicate with Spanish-speaking pet owners with limited proficiency in English. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2016; 248 (06) 690-699
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 29 Landau RE, Beck A, Glickman LT, Litster A, Widmar NJ, Moore GE. Use of veterinary services by Latino dog and cat owners with various degrees of English-language proficiency. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2016; 248 (06) 681-689
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 30 Beatty PC, Willis GB. Research Synthesis: The Practice of Cognitive Interviewing. Public Opin Q 2007; 71: 287-311
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 31 Willis G. Cognitive Interviewing. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage Publications; 2005.
    CrossrefSuche in Google Scholar
  • 32 Ryan K, Gannon-Slater N, Culbertson MJ. Improving survey methods with cognitive interviews in small- and medium-scale evaluations. Am J Eval 2012; 33: 414-430
    PubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 33 Willis G. Analysis of the Cognitive Interview in Questionnaire Design. Oxford University Press; 2015
    Suche in Google Scholar
  • 34 Webster K, Cella D, Yost K. The Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) Measurement System: properties, applications, and interpretation. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2003; 1: 79
    CrossrefPubMedSuche in Google Scholar
  • 35 ITIFDO Publique. IFOP survey: The place of pets within the couple – Vetocanis Annual report, 2022. Vetocanis; 2022
    Suche in Google Scholar