1 . 2024

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Russian version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measures (FAAM-Ru)

Abstract

The Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) assessment system is used for self-assessment of the function and daily activity of patients with foot or ankle joint diseases. The scale is validated in 13 different languages, but not in Russian, and allows for evaluation in a wide range of diseases.

Aim. The aim of the study is a cross-cultural adaptation of the FAAM evaluation system into Russian and a subsequent validation of the Russian-language version of FAAM (FAAM-Ru).

Material and methods. The study consists of 2 stages. At the first stage, cross-cultural adaptation was performed based on the recommendations of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). At the second stage, validation of the scale relative to the EuroQol-5D-3L evaluation system was performed among patients requiring planned surgical treatment of foot or ankle joint diseases.

Results. Internal consistency or uniformity of the evaluation scale of the Kronbach alpha coefficient FAAM-Ru ADL: 0.961 (CI 95% 0.927–0.984, p<0.05); FAAM-Ru Sport: 0.956 (CI 95% 0.914–0.982, p<0.05). ICC FAAM ADL Retest reliability: 0.889 (CI 95% 0.844–0.912, p<0.05), FAAM Sport: 0.858 (95% CI 0.821–0.868, p<0.05).

Conclusion. The results of the FAAM-Ru ADL and FAAM-Ru Sport studies have high values of uniformity of the evaluation scales by the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient (for ADL: 0.961; Sport: 0.956), which is slightly less in the Sport category than in the original questionnaire (ADL: 0.96; Sport: 0.98). From this it can be concluded that the questions in the questionnaires correspond adequately to each other and there are no significant differences from the original questionnaires.

Keywords:foot; ankle; questionnaire; cross cultural adaptation

Funding. The study had no sponsor support.

Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

For citation: Lutsenko A.M., Kerimova L.G., Prizov A.P., Ananyin D.A., Lazko F.L. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Russian version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measures (FAAM-Ru). Clinical and Experimental Surgery. Petrovsky Journal. 2024; 12 (1): 135–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33029/2308-1198-2024-12-1-135-140 (in Russian)

References

1. Martin R.L., Irrgang J.J., Burdett R.G., Conti S.F., Swearingen J.M.V. Evidence of validity for the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Foot Ankle Int. 2005; 26 (11): 968–83.

2. Cervera-Garvi P., Ortega-Avila A.B., Morales-Asencio J.M., Cervera-Marin J.A., Martin R.R., Gijon-Nogueron G. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of Spanish version of The Foot and Ankle Ability Measures (FAAM-Sp). J Foot Ankle Res. 2017; 10 (1): 39.

3. Martin R.L., Hutt D.M., Wukich D.K. Validity of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) in diabetes mellitus. Foot Ankle Int. 2009; 30 (4): 297–302.

4. Arunakul M., Arunakul P., Suesiritumrong C., Angthong C., Chernchujit B. Validity and reliability of Thai Version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) subjective form. J Med Assoc Thai. 2015; 98 (6): 561–7.

5. Borloz S., Crevoisier X., Deriaz O., Ballabeni P., Martin R.L., Luthi F. Evidence for validity and reliability of a french version of the FAAM. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2011; 12 (1): 40.

6. Çelik D., Malkoç M., Martin R. Evidence for reliability, validity and responsiveness of Turkish Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM). Rheumatol Int. 2016; 36 (10): 1469–76.

7. González-Sánchez M., Li G.Z., Ruiz Muñoz M., Cuesta-Vargas A.I. Foot and ankle ability measure to measure functional limitations in patients with foot and ankle disorders: a Chinese cross-cultural adaptation and validation. Disabil Rehabil. 2017; 39 (21): 2182–9.

8. Mazaheri M., Salavati M., Negahban H., Sohani S.M., Taghizadeh F., Feizi A., et al. Reliability and validity of the Persian version of Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) to measure functional limitations in patients with foot and ankle disorders. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2010; 18 (6): 755–9.

9. Moreira T.S., Magalhães L. de C., Silva R.D., Martin R.L., Resende M.A. de. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validity of the Brazilian version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure questionnaire. Disabil Rehabil. 2016; 38 (25): 2479–90.

10. Nauck T., Lohrer H. Translation, cross-cultural adaption and validation of the German version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure for patients with chronic ankle instability. Br J Sports Med. 2011; 45 (10): 785–90.

11. Obionu K.C., Krogsgaard M.R., Hansen C.F., Comins J.D. Dual-panel translation to Danish and Rasch validation of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM-DK). Foot Ankle Surg. 2022; 28 (5): 588–94.

12. Sartorio F., Vercelli S., Bravini E., Bargeri S., Moroso M., Plebani G., et al. [Foot and ankle ability measure: cross-cultural translation and validation of the Italian version of the ADL module (FAAM-I/ADL)]. Med Lav. 2014; 105 (5): 357–65.

13. Uematsu D., Suzuki H., Sasaki S., Nagano Y., Shinozuka N., Sunagawa N., et al. Evidence of validity for the Japanese version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure. J Athl Train. 2015; 50 (1): 65–70.

14. Weel H., Zwiers R., Azim D., Sierevelt I.N., Haverkamp D., van Dijk C.N., et al. Validity and reliability of a Dutch version of the Foot and Ankle Ability Measure. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016; 24 (4): 1348–54.

15. Akulova A.I., Gaydukova I.Z., Rebrov A.P. Validation of the EQ-5D-5L version in Russia. Rheumatol Sci Pract. 2018; 56 (3): 351–5.

16. Wild D., Grove A., Martin M., Eremenco S., McElroy S., Verjee-Lorenz A., et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR Task Force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value Health. 2005; 8 (2): 94–104.