Total amount: € 0,00
Official Journal of the , , , ,
In association with
Indexed/Abstracted in: CINAHL, Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, EMBASE, PubMed/MEDLINE, Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch), Scopus
Impact Factor 2,063
Online ISSN 1973-9095
Ferriero G. 1, Dughi D. 1, Orlandini D. 2, Moscato T. 2, Nicita D. 2, Franchignoni F. 1
1 Unit of Occupational Rehabilitation and Ergonomics Salvatore Maugeri Foundation Scientific Institute, Veruno (Novara), Italy
2 INAIL Prosthesis Center, Vigorso di Budrio (Bologna), Italy
Aim. Recently 2 questionnaires have been developed for people with lower limb amputation to determine, in follow-up studies, the level of function and extent of prosthetic use, to measure major life domains connected with prosthesis function, and to study the factors potentially related to prosthetic use: the Prosthetic Profile of the Amputee (PPA) and the Prosthesis Evaluation Questionnaire (PEQ). The purpose of the present study was: a) to produce Italian versions of both PPA (PPA-it) and PEQ (PEQ-it), using a validated procedure of cross-cultural translation; b) to analyse and discuss the internal consistency and construct validity of the main sections of the 2 questionnaires, in an Italian population.
Methods. The PPA questionnaire consists of 44 questions arranged in 6 sections. The PEQ is composed of 82 questions subdivided into 9 scales related to 4 sectors. In order to produce the Italian versions of the PPA and PEQ the forward/backward translation method was used. The final versions of the questionnaires were mailed to 110 patients and 95 of them returned the questionarries.
Results. The Cronbach’s α of Locomotor Capabilities Index (LCI/5), part of the PPA, was 0.97, and those of the 9 PEQ-it scales ranged from 0.64 (appearance) to 0.95 (mobility, MO). The LCI/5 and MO correlated highly with each other (rs=0.81) and with the variables related to prosthesis use. There was a significant correlation among the PEQ-it domains concerning MO, prosthesis function, psycho-social aspects and well-being.
Conclusion. Unfortunately, the acceptability and feasibility of both questionnaires (rather low completion rate, visual analogue scale format of PEQ, demanding scoring procedures) were sub-optimal, and their structure (item selection, response format, scaling properties, etc.) would need some refinement and simplification in order to facilitate a broader clinical use. On the other hand, findings for the LCI/5 (PPA) and MO (PEQ) are encouraging (particularly regarding the first scale) and confirm their sound practical and psychometric features.