Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Measurement properties of translated versions of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 Patient Questionnaire, SRS-22: a systematic review

  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The Scoliosis Research Society-22 Patient Questionnaire (SRS-22) has been translated into various languages and tested in patients with scoliosis. However, the translations and their psychometric properties have never been systematically reviewed. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties and to provide the current level of evidence of all the available translations of the SRS-22 using the “COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments” (COSMIN).

Methods

A systematic review was performed. The PubMed, Medline, EMbase, and CINAHL databases were searched for articles concerning the translations of the SRS-22 and/or evaluating any of their measurement properties. Two reviewers independently assessed the methodological quality and the psychometric estimates of the selected studies by using the 4-point rating scale COSMIN checklist and a validated quality assessment criteria, respectively. The level of evidence of each psychometric property per language was determined combining COSMIN outcomes and psychometric results.

Results

The search strategy led to 24 articles evaluating the SRS-22 in 17 different languages. The methodological quality of the properties was mostly poor to fair, and there was a lack of information regarding them. The overall assessment was positive in 42.5 % of cases. The level of evidence resulted in a limited positive evidence in 11 languages.

Conclusions

The Chinese (traditional), Dutch, Italian, Norwegian, and Spanish translations are advisable; the Greek, Japanese, Korean, Persian, Thai, and Turkish translations showed encouraging results but should be used with caution; the Brazilian, Chinese (simplified), Polish, and Swedish translations showed contradictory or scarce results, and no suggestions can be formulated; the French Canadian and German translations did not provide methodologically sound information. Further attention should be given to cross-cultural and structural validity, hypothesis testing, and responsiveness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AIS:

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

AUC:

Area under the curve

CHQ-CF87:

Child Health Questionnaire-Child Form 87

COSMIN:

COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments

DIF:

Differential item functioning

HRQoL:

Health-Related Quality of Life

ICC:

Intraclass correlation coefficient

IRT:

Item response theory

LOA:

Limits of agreement

MIC:

Minimal important change

NCSS:

Non-clinically significant scoliosis

RMDQ:

Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire

SDC:

Smallest detectable change

SF-12:

Short-Form Health Survey-12 items

SF-36:

Short-Form Health Survey-36 items

SR:

Systematic review

SRS-22:

Scoliosis Research Society-22 Patient Questionnaire

VAS:

Visual analogue scale

References

  1. Asher, M. A., Lai, S. M., Burton, D., & Manna, B. (2003). The reliability and concurrent validity of the SRS-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine, 28(1), 63–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Asher, M. A., Lai, S. M., Burton, D., & Manna, B. (2003). Scoliosis Research Society-22 Patient Questionnaire: Responsiveness to change associated with surgical treatment: Preliminary results. Spine, 28(1), 70–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Asher, M. A., Lai, S. M., & Burton, D. C. (2000). Further development and validation of the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcomes instrument. Spine, 25(18), 2381–2386.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Asher, M. A., Lai, S. M., Burton, D., & Manna, B. (2003). Discrimination validity of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 Patient Questionnaire: Relationship to idiopathic scoliosis curve pattern and curve size. Spine, 28(1), 74–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Asher, M. A., Lai, S. M., Glattes, C., Burton, D. C., Alanay, A., & Bago, J. (2006). Refinement of the SRS-22 health-related quality of life questionnaire function domain. Spine, 31(5), 593–597.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lai, S. M., Asher, M. A., & Burton, D. (2006). Estimating SRS-22 quality of life measures with SF-36. Application in idiopathic scoliosis. Spine, 31(4), 473–478.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. de Vet, H. C. W., Terwee, C. B., Mokkink, L. B., & Knol, D. J. (2011). Measurement in medicine: A practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  8. Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: An international Delphi study. Quality of Life Research, 19(4), 539–549.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Knol, D. L., Stratford, P. W., Alonso, J., Patrick, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 10, 22.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Terwee, C. B., Mokkink, L. B., Knol, D. L., Ostelo, R. W., Bouter, L. M., & de Vet, H. C. (2012). Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: A scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Quality of Life Research, 21(4), 651–657.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mokkink, L. B., Terwee, C. B., Patrick, D. L., Alonso, J., Stratford, P. W., Knol, D. L., et al. (2010). The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(7), 737–745.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D. M., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A. W. M., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. van Tulder, M., Furlan, A., Bombardier, C., Bouter, L., & Editorial Board CBRG. (2003). Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group. Spine, 28(12), 1290–1299.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Furlan, A. D., Pennick, V., Bombardier, C., van Tulder, M., & Editorial Board CBRG. (2009). 2009 updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Back Review Group. Spine, 34(18), 1929–1941.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosanova, G. C., Gabriel, B. S., Camarini, P. M., Gianini, P. E., Coehlo, D. M., & Oliveira, A. S. (2010). Concurrent validity of the Brazilian version of SRS-22r with Br-SF-36. Revista Brasileira de Fisioterapia, 14(2), 121–126.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Camarini, P. M., Rosanova, G. C., Gabriel, B. S., Gianini, P. E., & Oliveira, A. S. (2013). The Brazilian version of the SRS-22r questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, 17(5), 494–505.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhao, L., Zhang, Y., Sun, X., Du, Q., & Shang, L. (2007). The Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire adapted for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients in China: Reliability and validity analysis. Journal of Children’s Orthopaedics, 1(6), 351–355.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Cheung, K., Senkoylu, A., Alanay, A., Genc, Y., Lau, S., & Luk, K. D. (2007). Reliability and concurrent validity of the adapted Chinese version of Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) Questionnaire. Spine, 32(10), 1141–1145.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Li, M., Wang, C. F., Gu, S. X., He, S. S., Zhu, X. D., Zhao, Y. C., & Zhang, J. T. (2009). Adapted simplified Chinese (mainland) version of Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire. Spine, 34(12), 1321–1324.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Qiu, G., Qiu, Y., Zhu, Z., Liu, Z., Song, Y., Hai, Y., et al. (2011). Re-evaluation of reliability and validity of simplified Chinese version of SRS-22 patient questionnaire: A multicenter study of 333 cases. Spine, 36(8), E545–E550.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Schlösser, T. P., Stadhouder, A., Schimmel, J. J., Lehr, A. M., van der Heijden, G. J., & Castelein, R. M. (2013). Reliability and validity of the adapted Dutch version of the revised Scoliosis Research Society 22-item Questionnaire. The Spine Journal,. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2013.09.046.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Beausejour, M., Joncas, J., Goulet, L., Roy-Beaudry, M., Parent, S., Grimard, G., et al. (2009). Reliability and validity of adapted French Canadian version of Scoliosis Research Society outcomes Questionnaire (SRS-22) in Quebec. Spine, 34(6), 623–628.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lonjon, G., Ilharreborde, B., Odent, T., Moreau, S., Glorion, C., & Mazda, K. (2014). Reliability and validity of the French-Canadian version of the Scoliosis Research Society 22 Questionnaire in France. Spine, 39(1), E26–E34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Niemeyer, T., Schubert, C., Halm, H. F., Herberts, T., Leichtle, C., & Gesicki, M. (2009). Validity and reliability of an adapted German version of Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire. Spine, 34(8), 818–821.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Antonarakos, P. D., Katrinitsa, L., Angelis, L., Paganas, A., Koen, E. M., Christodoulou, E. A., & Christodoulou, A. G. (2009). Reliability and validity of the adapted Greek version of Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) Questionnaire. Scoliosis, 4, 14.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Potoupnis, M., Papavasiliou, K., Kenanidis, E., Pellios, S., Kapetanou, A., Sayegh, F., & Kapetanos, G. (2012). Reliability and concurrent validity of the adapted Greek version of the Scoliosis Research Society-22r Questionnaire. A cross-sectional study performed on conservatively treated patients. Hippokratia, 16(3), 225–229.

    CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Monticone, M., Baiardi, P., Calabrò, D., Calabrò, F., & Foti, C. (2010). Development of the Italian version of the revised Scoliosis Research Society-22 Patient Questionnaire, SRS-22r-I: Cross-cultural adaptation, factor analysis, reliability, and validity. Spine, 35(24), E1412–E1417.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hashimoto, H., Sase, T., Arai, Y., Maruyama, T., Isobe, K., & Shouno, Y. (2007). Validation of a Japanese version of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 Patient Questionnaire among idiopathic scoliosis patients in Japan. Spine, 32(4), E141–E146.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lee, J. S., Lee, D. H., Suh, K. T., Kim, J. I., Lim, J. M., & Goh, T. S. (2011). Validation of the Korean version of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire. European Spine Journal, 20(10), 1751–1756.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Adobor, R. D., Rimeslåtten, S., Keller, A., & Brox, J. I. (2010). Repeatability, reliability, and concurrent validity of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire and EuroQol in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine, 35(2), 206–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Mousavi, S. J., Mobini, B., Mehdian, H., Akbarnia, B., Bouzari, B., Askary-Ashtiani, A., et al. (2010). Reliability and validity of the Persian version of the Scoliosis Research Society-22r Questionnaire. Spine, 35(7), 784–789.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Glowacki, M., Misterska, E., Laurentowska, M., & Mankowski, P. (2009). Polish adaptation of Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire. Spine, 34(10), 1060–1065.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Bago, J., Climent, J. M., Ey, A., Perez-Grueso, F. J., & Izquierdo, E. (2004). The Spanish version of the SRS-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis: Transcultural adaptation and reliability analysis. Spine, 29(15), 1676–1680.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Climent, J. M., Bago, J., Ey, A., Perez-Grueso, F. J., & Izquierdo, E. (2005). Validity of the Spanish version of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 Patient Questionnaire. Spine, 30(6), 705–709.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Danielsson, A. J., & Romberg, K. (2013). Reliability and validity of the Swedish version of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22r) Patient Questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine, 38(21), 1875–1884.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Leelapattana, P., Keorochana, G., Johnson, J., Wajanavisit, W., & Laohacharoensombat, W. (2011). Reliability and validity of an adapted Thai version of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire. Journal of Children’s Orthopaedics, 5(1), 35–40.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Sathira-Angkura, V., Pithankuakul, K., Sakulpipatana, S., Piyaskulkaew, C., & Kunakornsawat, S. (2012). Validity and reliability of an adapted Thai Version of Scoliosis Research Society-22 Questionnaire for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine, 37(9), 783–787.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Alanay, A., Cil, A., Berk, H., Acaroglu, R. E., Yazici, M., Akcali, O., et al. (2005). Reliability and validity of adapted Turkish version of Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) Questionnaire. Spine, 30(21), 2464–2468.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychological Assessment, 7(3), 286–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. De Vet, H. C. W., Ader, H. J., Terwee, C. B., & Pouwer, F. (2005). Are factor analytical techniques appropriately used in the validation of health status questionnaires? A systematic review on the quality of factor analyses of the SF-36. Quality of Life Research, 14(5), 1203–1218.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Fayers, P. M., Curran, D., & Machin, D. (1998). Incomplete quality of life data in randomized trials: Missing items. Statics in Medicine, 17(5–7), 679–696.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Terwee, C. B., Schellingerhout, J. M., Verhagen, A. P., Koes, B. W., & de Vet, H. C. (2011). Methodological quality of studies on the measurement properties of neck pain and disability questionnaires: A systematic review. Journal of Manipulative and Physiological Therapeutics, 34(4), 261–272.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Lai, S. M., Asher, M. A., Burton, D. C., & Carlson, B. B. (2010). Identification of Scoliosis Research Society-22r health-related quality of life questionnaire domains using factor analysis methodology. Spine, 35(12), 1236–1240.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Schellingerhout, J. M., Verhagen, A. P., Heymans, M. W., Koes, B. W., de Vet, H. C., & Terwee, C. B. (2012). Measurement properties of disease-specific questionnaires in patients with neck pain: A systematic review. Quality of Life Research, 21(4), 659–670.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Schellingerhout, J. M., Heymans, M. W., Verhagen, A. P., de Vet, H. C., Koes, B. W., & Terwee, C. B. (2011). Measurement properties of translated versions of neck-specific questionnaires: A systematic review. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11, 87.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Kevin Smart for his help in preparing the English version of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Unit, Scientific Institute of Lissone, Institute of Care and Research, Salvatore Maugeri Foundation, IRCCS, Via Monsignor Bernasconi 16, 20035, Lissone, Monza Brianza, MI, Italy

    Marco Monticone, Claudia Nava, Vittorio Leggero, Barbara Rocca, Stefano Salvaderi & Emilia Ambrosini

  2. Neuroengineering and Medical Robotics Laboratory, Department of Electronics, Informations and Bioengineering, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy

    Simona Ferrante & Emilia Ambrosini

Authors
  1. Marco Monticone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Claudia Nava
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vittorio Leggero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Barbara Rocca
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stefano Salvaderi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Simona Ferrante
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Emilia Ambrosini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Monticone.

Additional information

IRB approval. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Salvatore Maugeri Foundation’s Scientific Institute in Lissone.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Monticone, M., Nava, C., Leggero, V. et al. Measurement properties of translated versions of the Scoliosis Research Society-22 Patient Questionnaire, SRS-22: a systematic review. Qual Life Res 24, 1981–1998 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-0935-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-015-0935-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation