Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment tool into Danish

Astrup, Katrine; Corner, Evelyn J; Hansen, Marianne Godt; Petersen, Annemette Krintel

doi:10.1080/09593985.2018.1548048

Cited by 7 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A strength was the involvement of the original author (Evelyn Corner) throughout the process. As was the case in the translation and adaptation of the CPAx into Danish [19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Cross-cultural adaptation and inter-rater reliability of the Swedish version of the Chelsea critical care assessment tool (CPAX-Swe) in critically ill patients

Holdar

Eriksson

Siesage

et al. 2019

Disability and Rehabilitation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To translate and culturally adapt the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool into Swedish and to test the interrater reliability of the Swedish version in critically ill patients. Design: Observational study Methods: Translation and cross-cultural adaptation was performed in line with international recommendations, including forward and backward translation and expert round table discussions. The inter-rater reliability of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool-Swedish was then explored in 50 critically ill adult patients, pragmatically recruited, in a University Hospital clinical setting. Reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient for aggregated scores and quadratic weighted Cohen's kappa analysis for individual items Results: The expert round table discussion group agreed that the translation was a satisfactory equivalent to the original version and applicable for use within the clinical setting. Reliability of aggregated scores and individual items were very good (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.97 and quadric weighted kappa values ranging from 0.88 to 0.98). The measurement error for aggregated scores was low, with a standard error of measurement of 1.79, smallest detectable change of 4.95, and limits of agreement of 5.20 and-4.76. The percentage agreement for individual items ranged from 64% to 88%. Conclusion: The Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool-Swedish was found applicable and appropriate for assessment of functioning in critically ill patients in an acute setting in Sweden, and it displayed high inter-rater reliability. This implies that the Swedish version can be used as assessment tool within intensive care and acute wards in Sweden.

show abstract

“…A strength was the involvement of the original author (Evelyn Corner) throughout the process. As was the case in the translation and adaptation of the CPAx into Danish [19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Cross-cultural adaptation and inter-rater reliability of the Swedish version of the Chelsea critical care assessment tool (CPAX-Swe) in critically ill patients

Holdar

Eriksson

Siesage

et al. 2019

Disability and Rehabilitation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Discrepancies were solved by discussion within a multidisciplinary expert committee and verified with the original author to ensure a conceptually equivalent version. This approach has proved to be successful for the currently available Swedish and Danish CPAx translations [34,35]. Nevertheless, there are limitations to the German translation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

German version of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool (CPAx-GE): translation, cross-cultural adaptation, validity, and reliability

Eggmann

Verra

Stefanicki

et al. 2021

Disability and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To translate and cross-culturally adapt the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment tool from English to German (CPAx-GE) and to examine its validity and reliability. Materials and methods: Following a forward-backward translation including an expert round table discussion, the measurement properties of the CPAx-GE were explored in critically ill, mechanically ventilated adults. We investigated construct, cross-sectional, and cross-cultural validity of the CPAx-GE with other measurement instruments at pre-specified timepoints, analysed relative reliability with intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and determined absolute agreement with the Bland-Altman plots. Results: Consensus for the translated CPAx-GE was reached. Validity was excellent with >80% of the prespecified hypotheses accepted at baseline, critical care, and hospital discharge. Interrater reliability was high (ICCs > 0.8) across all visits. Limit of agreement ranged from À2 to 2 points. Error of measurement was small, floor, and ceiling effects limited. Conclusions: The CPAx-GE demonstrated excellent construct, cross-sectional, and cross-cultural validity as well as high interrater reliability in critically ill adults with prolonged mechanical ventilation at baseline, critical care, and hospital discharge. Consequently, the CPAx-GE can be assumed equal to the original and recommended in the German-speaking area to assess physical function and activity of critically ill adults across the critical care and hospital stay. Trial registration: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS) identification number: DRKS00012983 (https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00012983), registered on 20 September 2017, first patient enrolled on 21 November 2017. ä IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONEarly rehabilitation of critically ill patients is recommended to prevent and treat the subsequent functional disability, but a suitable measurement instrument for the German-speaking area is lacking. The translated, cross-culturally adapted German CPAx demonstrated excellent validity and reliability in assessing physical function and activity in critically ill adults. Cross-sectional validity of the CPAx has been newly established and allows the use of this tool at clinically relevant time-points in the course of a critical illness. The CPAx-GE can therefore be used in clinical practice by German-speaking therapists to assess physical function and activity during early rehabilitation in the ICU and hospital.

show abstract

“…Use of CPAx is not yet ubiquitous; however, it has been translated into several languages and correlates well to other methods such as MRC‐SS. 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 Taken together, the advantages of CPAx has experts to advocate for its use specifically in the functional assessment of post‐ICU COVID‐19 patients. 5 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Use of CPAx is not yet ubiquitous; however, it has been translated into several languages and correlates well to other methods such as MRC-SS. [15][16][17][18][19] Taken together, the advantages of CPAx has experts to advocate for its use specifically in the functional assessment of post-ICU COVID-19 patients. 5 In contrast to the MRC-SS and the CPAx, the change in POP-HGS between ICU and hospital discharge in our study was not different for COVID-19 patients compared with non-COVID pneumosepsis patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical recovery of COVID‐19 pneumosepsis intensive care survivors compared with non‐COVID pneumosepsis intensive care survivors during post–intensive care hospitalization: The RECOVID retrospective cohort study

Moonen

Strookappe

Zanten

2021

J Parenter Enteral Nutr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background. Coronavirus Disease 2019 pneumosepsis survivors are at a high risk of developing ICU acquired weakness (ICUAW), due to high incidence of acute respiratory distress syndrome and the common need for prolonged invasive ventilation. It remains unknown if regular post-pneumosepsis physical rehabilitation strategies are suitable for this extraordinary patient category.Methods. We retrospectively compared the physical recovery of COVID-19 and non-COVID pneumosepsis ICU survivors between ICU-and hospital discharge, defined as the difference in performance on the Medical Research Council Sum-Score (MRC-SS), Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment tool (CPAx), and percentage of predicted handgrip strength (POP-HGS). An ANCOVA model was built using age, sex, Barthel-index, BMI, admission APACHE-II score, adequacy of protein delivery during ICU stay and ward length of stay as covariates. Results. 35 COVID-19 ICU patients could be compared to 21 non-COVID pneumosepsis ICU survivors. All patients scored ≤48 on the MRC-SS at ICU discharge, indicating ICUAW. ICUAW had resolved in more COVID-19, than in non-COVID patients upon hospital discharge, although not significantly (52% vs. 22%, p=.081). When controlling for covariates, COVID-19 patients performed worse on all physical functioning assessments upon ICU discharge, but had improved more at hospital discharge on the MRC-SS (ɳ 2 =0.214, p=.002) and CPAx (ɳ 2 =0.153, p=.011). POP-HGS remained lower in COVID-19 patients throughout hospital stay. Conclusion. COVID-19 ICU-survivors are a vulnerable group concerning ICUAW, but they show better tendency towards physical rehabilitation than non-COVID pneumosepsis ICU-survivors during the post-ICU hospitalization period regarding MRC-SS and CPAx. COVID-19 ICU patients might benefit from early, more intensive physical therapy. Clinical Relevancy Statement. COVID-19 ICU survivors are at high risk for ICU-acquired weakness, which is well known to have immense personal and societal consequences. As the group of COVID-19 ICU survivors is

show abstract

Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment tool into Danish

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

Cross-cultural adaptation and inter-rater reliability of the Swedish version of the Chelsea critical care assessment tool (CPAX-Swe) in critically ill patients

Cross-cultural adaptation and inter-rater reliability of the Swedish version of the Chelsea critical care assessment tool (CPAX-Swe) in critically ill patients

German version of the Chelsea Critical Care Physical Assessment Tool (CPAx-GE): translation, cross-cultural adaptation, validity, and reliability

Physical recovery of COVID‐19 pneumosepsis intensive care survivors compared with non‐COVID pneumosepsis intensive care survivors during post–intensive care hospitalization: The RECOVID retrospective cohort study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About