Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS)
Citation
TURHAN E, DEMİREL M, DAYLAK A, HURİ G, DORAL M, ÇELİK D (2017). Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score (OMAS). Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, 51(1), 60 - 64.Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the Olerud-Molander Ankle Score(OMAS) into Turkish and to assess its reliability and validity.Methods: The Turkish version of the OMAS (OMAS-Tr) was developed after the translation and backtranslation, which included the stages recommended by Beaton. The OMAS-Tr was administered toone hundred patients (49 females, 51 males; average age: 42.3± 17.7; range 16e81 years) with malleolarfractures. The OMAS-Tr was completed twice by each participant at 7- to 10-days intervals to assess testretest reliability based on the interrater correlation coefŞcient, whereas Cronbach's alpha evaluatedinternal consistency. The external validity was evaluated with correlations between the Turkish versionof the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) and the Turkish version of the SF-12 questionnaire. Thedistribution offloor and ceiling effects was also analyzed.Results: The internal consistency (Cronbach'sa¼ 0.84) and the test-retest reliability (ICC ¼ 0.98) wereexcellent. The mean interval between the two tests was 8.6± 1.4 days. The mean and standard deviationof theŞrst and second assessments of the OMAS-Tr were 74.1 ± 23.7 and 75.7 ± 23.9, respectively. Therewas a strong correlation between the OMAS-Tr and the FAAM subscales on activities of daily living andsports (r¼ 0.86, r ¼ 0.83; p < 0.001, respectively). The OMAS-Tr displayed very good to good correlationwith the SF-12 physical component score and the SF-12 mental component score (r¼ 0.72, r ¼ 0.60,p< 0.001, respectively).Conclusion: OMAS-Tr was a valid and reliable tool to assess ankle fracture-related problems. Nonetheless,further studies are needed to assess its responsiveness.Level of evidence: Level III, diagnostic study.© 2016 Turkish Association of Orthopaedics and Traumatology. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V. This isan open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)