Validity and reliability of the Greek version of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale - Short Form (DFS-SF)

Kontodimopoulos, Nick; Veniou, Anastasia; Tentolouris, Nikolaοs; Niakas, Dimitris

doi:10.14310/horm.2002.1682

Cited by 16 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The DFS‐SF‐K is considered to have a high internal consistency as a tool to measure the QoL of patients with diabetic foot. Given that the reliability coefficient of the original English tool was 0.93, that of the translated Chinese tool was 0.90, and that of the adapted Greek tool was 0.94, the DFS‐SF‐K shows a higher level of reliability than the tools reported in other similar studies …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

“…Therefore, the DFS‐SF could be regarded as an appealing instrument in assessing the QoL of patients with diabetic foot. Thus, many countries have translated the DFS‐SF into different languages and use these translated versions . However, no Korean version is yet available.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, many countries have translated the DFS-SF into different languages and use these translated versions. [19][20][21] However, no Korean version is yet available.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Translation and validation of the Korean version of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale‐Short Form

Lee

2019

International Wound Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to translate the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale‐Short Form (DFS‐SF) into Korean and evaluate its psychometric performance in patients with diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). The DFS‐SF was translated into Korean using translation guidelines from the World Health Organization. The Korean version of DFS‐SF (DFS‐SF‐K) went through the full linguistic validation process and was evaluated in 320 Korean patients with DFU. For this study, Cronbach's alpha was used to evaluate the reliability of the DFS‐SF‐K. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and known‐group validity were conducted to examine construct validity. Correlation of the DFS‐SF‐K with SF‐36 was used to test concurrent validity of the DFS‐SF‐K. Cronbach's alpha was >0.70 for all scales. Factor loadings of the 29 items on the six subscales ranged from 0.82 to 0.95. The six‐subscale model was validated by CFA (x2/df = 4.55, P < 0.001, RMR = 0.06, GFI = 0.73, NFI = 0.90, TLI = 0.91, CFI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.10). Spearman's correlations and known‐groups comparisons supported construct validity. The newly translated DFS‐SF‐K may be used to assess the impact of QoL with DFUs in Korean patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Translation and validation of the Korean version of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale‐Short Form

Lee

2019

International Wound Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Criterion validity refers to the extent to which scores on a particular instrument relate to a gold standard. EQ5D has been used in several pivotal studies in patients with DFU 36–38. HRQoL scores will be measured at baseline and at 6 months (defined as 4–8 months).…”

Section: Methods and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A shortened version, the DFS Short Form (DFS-SF), showed similar robustness and responsiveness compared with its original version,13 and is with 29 questions a more ‘user-friendly ’ tool for everyday clinical practice. Despite its translation to several languages and subsequent use in studies14–19 its measurement properties have, however, not yet been studied and reported across all the relevant dimensions of the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Taxonomy of Measurement Properties 20. There are Dutch translations of DFS for Belgium and of DFS-SF for the Netherlands available which have undergone a full linguistic process according to the recognised methodology of translation as described in Linguistic Validation Manual for Health Outcome Assessments 21.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health-related quality of life in patients with diabetic foot ulceration: study protocol for adaptation and validation of patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) in Dutch-speaking patients

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionDiabetic foot ulceration (DFU) is a common late-stage complication of diabetes with a large impact on health status and quality of life. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide a standardised method of obtaining patients’ views on their well-being. The DFU Scale Short Form (DFS-SF) is a validated disease-specific PROM for measuring health-related quality of life among DFU patients. The Lower Extremity Functional Scale (LEFS) is another PROM that can be used to measure physical functioning in patients with lower extremity disorders. The LEFS is not yet validated for DFU. Both instruments are not validated in the Dutch language. The purpose of this study is to culturally adapt and validate the DFS-SF and LEFS questionnaires for Belgian Dutch-speaking patients with DFU.Methods and analysisThis study will be conducted as a monocentre observational cohort study in DFU patients presenting at a hospital-based multidisciplinary diabetic foot clinic. Data will be collected from the medical electronic files and from DFS-SF, LEFS and five-level EuroQol five-dimension questionnaires that will be presented to the patients at defined time points. Reproducibility, internal consistency, floor and ceiling effects, construct validity and responsiveness will be assessed for the DFS-SF and LEFS.Ethics and disseminationThe study protocol has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Onze-Lieve-Vrouw Hospital (Aalst, Belgium). The results of the study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

show abstract

Patient-reported outcome measures for assessing health-related quality of life in people with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review

Langendoen-Gort

Groeneveld

Prinsen

et al. 2022

Rev Endocr Metab Disord

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are important tools to assess outcomes relevant to patients, with Health-Related Quality Of Life (HRQOL) as an important construct to be measured. Many different HRQOL PROMs are used in the type 2 diabetes field, however a complete overview of these PROMs is currently lacking. We therefore aimed to systematically describe and classify the content of all PROMs that have specifically been developed or validated to measure (aspects of) HRQOL in people with type 2 diabetes. A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE until 31 December 2021. Studies on the development or validation of a PROM measuring HRQOL, or aspects of HRQOL, in people with type 2 diabetes were included. Title and abstract and full-text screening were conducted by two independent researchers and data extraction was performed independently by one of the researchers. Data were extracted on language in which the PROM was developed, target population, construct(s) being measured, names of (sub)scales and number of items per (sub)scale. In addition, all PROMs and subscales were classified according to specific aspects of HRQOL based on the Wilson & Cleary model (symptom status, functional status, general health perceptions) to aid researchers in PROM selection. In total 220 studies were identified that developed or validated PROMs that measure (aspects of) HRQOL in people with type 2 diabetes. Of the 116 unique HRQOL PROMs, 91 (of the subscales) measured symptom status, 60 measured functional status and 26 measured general health perceptions. In addition, 16 of the PROMs (subscales) measured global quality of life. 61 of the 116 PROMs (subscales) also include characteristics of the individual (e.g. aspects of personality, coping) or environment (e.g. social or financial support) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs, e.g. measure of a patient's perception of their personal experience of the healthcare they have received, e.g. treatment satisfaction), which are not part of the HRQOL construct. Only 9 of the 116 PROMs measure all aspects of HRQOL based on the Wilson & Cleary model. Finally, 8 of the 116 PROMs stating to measure HRQOL, measured no HRQOL construct. In conclusion, a large number of PROMs are available for people with type 2 diabetes, which intend to measure (aspects of) HRQOL. These PROMs measure a large variety of (sub)constructs, which are not all HRQOL constructs, with a small amount of PROMs not measuring HRQOL at all. There is a need for consensus on which aspects of HRQOL should be measured in people with type 2 diabetes and which PROMs to use in research and daily practice. PROSPERO: CRD42017071012. COMET database: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/956.

show abstract

Validity and reliability of the Greek version of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale - Short Form (DFS-SF)

Cited by 16 publications

References 31 publications

Translation and validation of the Korean version of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale‐Short Form

Translation and validation of the Korean version of the Diabetic Foot Ulcer Scale‐Short Form

Health-related quality of life in patients with diabetic foot ulceration: study protocol for adaptation and validation of patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) in Dutch-speaking patients

Patient-reported outcome measures for assessing health-related quality of life in people with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About