Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2022; 57(03): 384-391
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1735233
Artigo Original

Cross-cultural Adaptation of Self-report S4-5 Sensory and Motor Function Questionnaire (S4-5Q) in People with Spinal Cord Injury to Portuguese

Article in several languages: português | English
Francielle Romanini 
1   Núcleo de Pesquisa em Lesão Medular, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Neurociência, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brasil
,
Thays de Souza Lima 
2   Núcleo de Pesquisa em Lesão Medular, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brasil
,
Libak Abou 
3   Departamento de Cinesiologia e Saúde Comunitária, Faculdade de Ciências Aplicadas à Saúde, Universidade de Illinois em Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, Estados Unidos
,
Jocemar Ilha 
1   Núcleo de Pesquisa em Lesão Medular, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Neurociência, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The “Self-report S4-5 sensory and motor function questionnaire (S4-5Q)” is a short questionnaire that aims to assess the function of the sacral segments, S4 and S5, after a spinal cord injury (SCI), with the purpose of replacing the rectal exam test. The aim of the present study was to carry out a cross-cultural adaptation of the S4-5Q to the Brazilian Portuguese language and to investigate the test-retest reliability of this version.

Method The translation and cross-cultural adaptation was performed using the methodology of translation and backtranslation. Initially, translations were done by three independent translators. Their synthesis was then submitted to an expert committee for analysis (SCI health professionals); then, the backtranslation to the original language was sent to the original author and, after all the adjustments, the final version was completed. For test-retest reliability, 24 individuals with chronic SCI were recruited (2 evaluations with an interval of 7 to 14 days between them). Statistical analysis was performed using IBM-SPSS (Version 20, SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA) with data pretabulated in Microsoft Excel (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA). Reliability was tested with Cohen Kappa, and internal consistency with Cronbach α, both adopting p < 0.05 as significant.

Results In the reliability analysis, the results of all questions showed almost perfect agreement (Kappa > 0.81) and good internal consistency (Cronbach α: 0.65–0.77) between the questions and final classification.

Conclusion The cross-culturally adapted S4-5Q is reliable to be applied to the Brazilian population with chronic SCI to determine their S4-5 sensory and motor function.

Keywords

spinal cord injury - sacral region - cross-cultural comparison - surveys and questionnaires

Work developed at the Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health and Sport Science, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Florianópolis, SC, Brazil.




Publication History

Received: 22 February 2021

Accepted: 08 March 2021

Article published online:
20 September 2021

© 2021. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. 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 commecial 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

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Kirshblum S, Botticello A, Benedetto J. et al. A Comparison of Diagnostic Stability of the ASIA Impairment Scale Versus Frankel Classification Systems for Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2020; 101 (09) 1556-1562
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Maynard Jr FM, Bracken MB, Creasey G. et al. International standards for neurological and functional classification of spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 1997; 35 (05) 266-274
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kirshblum S, Waring III W. Updates for the international standards for neurological classification of Spinal Cord Injury. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2014; 25 (03) 505-517 vii
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Harvey LA, Weber G, Heriseanu R, Bowden JL. The diagnostic accuracy of self-report for determining S4-5 sensory and motor function in people with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 2012; 50 (02) 119-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Roberts TT, Leonard GR, Cepela DJ. Classifications In Brief: American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) Impairment Scale. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2017; 475 (05) 1499-1504
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kirshblum S, Botticello A, Lammertse DP, Marino RJ, Chiodo AE, Jha A. The impact of sacral sensory sparing in motor complete spinal cord injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2011; 92 (03) 376-383
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Burns SP, Tansey KE. The Expedited International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (E-ISNCSCI). Spinal Cord 2020; 58 (06) 633-634
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Zariffa J, Kramer JLK, Jones LAT, Lammertse DP, Curt A, Steeves JD. European Multicenter Study about Spinal Cord Injury Study Group. Sacral sparing in SCI: beyond the S4-S5 and anorectal examination. Spine J 2012; 12 (05) 389-400
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Marino RJ, Schmidt-Read M, Kirshblum SC. et al. Reliability and Validity of S3 Pressure Sensation as an Alternative to Deep Anal Pressure in Neurologic Classification of Persons With Spinal Cord Injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016; 97 (10) 1642-1646
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Liu N, Xing H, Zhou MW, Biering-Sørensen F. Development and validation of a bowel-routine-based self-report questionnaire for sacral sparing after spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 2017; 55 (11) 1010-1015
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000; 25 (24) 3186-3191
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL. et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63 (07) 737-745
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977; 33 (01) 159-174
    Google Scholar
  • 14 Hamilton R, Kirshblum S, Sikka S, Callender L, Bennett M, Prajapati P. Sacral examination in spinal cord injury: Is it really needed?. J Spinal Cord Med 2018; 41 (05) 556-561
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar