2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2017.09.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Translation, cross-adaptation and measurement properties of the Brazilian version of the ACL-RSI Scale and ACL-QoL Questionnaire in patients with anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction

Abstract: HighlightsThe Brazilian versions of ACL-RSI and ACL-QoL were translated and culturally adapted.The Brazilian ACL-RSI and ACL-QoL demonstrated adequate measurement properties.The Brazilian ACL-RSI and ACLQoL are useful outcomes for clinical and research.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

7
49
2

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 50 publications
(61 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
7
49
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Internal consistentcy of the ACL-RSI-Lt, according to Cronbach alpha index, was 0.94 which is considered as excellent. Compared to the findings of our study, the Dutch [10] and Swedish [15] versions had the same Cronbach alpha (0.94), the Chinese [12] and French [14] versions had 0.96, the Turkish [11] version had 0.88 and the Brazilian [13] version had 0.87. All studies consolidate the strong correliation between the 12 questions of the scale, demonstraiting that 3 subscales (emotions, confidence in the performance and risk assessment) cannot be used separately.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 67%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Internal consistentcy of the ACL-RSI-Lt, according to Cronbach alpha index, was 0.94 which is considered as excellent. Compared to the findings of our study, the Dutch [10] and Swedish [15] versions had the same Cronbach alpha (0.94), the Chinese [12] and French [14] versions had 0.96, the Turkish [11] version had 0.88 and the Brazilian [13] version had 0.87. All studies consolidate the strong correliation between the 12 questions of the scale, demonstraiting that 3 subscales (emotions, confidence in the performance and risk assessment) cannot be used separately.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 67%
“…When compared ACL-RSI with the IKDC, the results revealed moderate correlation coefficients. In the Dutch version correlation between ACL-RSI and IKDC was 0.51 [10], in the Brazilian version was 0.58 [13], while in the Turkish version was 0.44 [11] and in the French version the correlation was 0.42 [14]. Chen et al [12] reported a week correlation between ACL-RSI and IKDC subscales.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This fact also occurs in the same direction with the stress and anxiety variables in the same subgroup of uninjured players, indicating, thus, a clear direction of the next research from this study, perhaps following the path outlined by Appaneal et al [23]. Consequently, it seems logical to consider that some psychological features related to the health, such as stress, anxiety and, or depression, could be, in one way or another, influencing both the players' vulnerability to injury and rehabilitation and re-insertion processes [39,40], being verified the existence of a bias regarding the gender of the athletes [18].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 53%
“…Webster, Feller, and Lambros (2008) developed and studied the validity of the ACL Return to Sports after Injury (ACL-RSI) scale, which was designed to evaluate three psychological responses of athletes in relation to sport resumption following ACL injury and/or surgery: emotions, confidence in performance, and risk appraisal. The ACL-RSI has been translated into several languages and is considered valid and reliable (Bohu, Klouche, Lefevre, Webster, & Herman, 2015;Chen et al, 2017;Harput et al, 2017;Kvist et al, 2013;Silva, Mendes, Lima, & Almeida, 2017;Slagers, Reininga, & van Den Akker-Scheek, 2017). Glazer developed the Injury Psychological Readiness to Return to Sport (I-PRRS) scale to assess the psychological readiness of injured athletes to return to sports participation, irrespectively of the type of injury (Glazer, 2009).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%