Translation and cultural adaptation of the CLEFT-Q into Arabic, Dutch, Hindi, Swedish, and Turkish


Tsangaris E., Riff K. W. Y. W. , Dreise M., Stiernman M., Kaur M. N. , Piplani B., ...More

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PLASTIC SURGERY, vol.41, no.6, pp.643-652, 2018 (Journal Indexed in ESCI) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 41 Issue: 6
  • Publication Date: 2018
  • Doi Number: 10.1007/s00238-018-1445-9
  • Title of Journal : EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PLASTIC SURGERY
  • Page Numbers: pp.643-652

Abstract

BackgroundTreatment for cleft lip and/or palate (CL/P) involves a multidisciplinary team of experts who aim to improve ones' appearance, health-related quality of life, and speech function. To appropriately measure outcomes in CL/P from the patient perspective, a CL/P-specific patient-reported outcome (PRO) instrument is needed. The CLEFT-Q is a self-report PRO instrument developed to evaluate treatment outcomes in patients with CL/P. The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the CLEFT-Q.MethodsThe CLEFT-Q was translated and culturally adapted from English into Arabic, Dutch, Hindi, Swedish, and Turkish using guidelines set forth by the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. For each language, two forward translations, one back translation, and cognitive debriefing interviews with patients were conducted.ResultsThe field test version of the CLEFT-Q consisted of 154 items across 13 scales. Forward translations for each language revealed few items that were difficult to translate into the various languages. Comparison of each back translation to the English version identified that a change in the meaning of an item was more common in the Turkish (n=40, 26%) and Arabic (n=17, 11%) translations, and required re-translation. Cognitive debriefing interviews involved 41 participants from plastic surgery centers in India, Qatar, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Turkey. Participants reported few difficulties in understanding the items, instructions, and response options in each CLEFT-Q translation.ConclusionsSemantic, idiomatic, experiential, and conceptual equivalence of the CLEFT-Q was achieved for all language versions, thus providing evidence of the CLEFT-Q's transferability to other languages and cultures.Level of Evidence: Not ratable