Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and reliability of the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form and the tampa scale for kinesiophobia (TSK) into Hebrew

  • Arthroscopy and Sports Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

The International Knee Documentation Committee−Subjective Form (IKDC-SF) is one of the most used measures for evaluating the quality of life among people experiencing knee pain but is not yet available in Hebrew. Similarly, the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), used to evaluate fear of movement, is not available in Hebrew. This study aimed to determine the reliability and construct validity of the Hebrew IKDC-SF and TSK among people experiencing chronic knee pain.

Materials and methods

Translation and cultural adaptation of the IKDC-SF and TSK questionnaires, followed by test–retest reliability within a two-week interval. We report on internal consistency, construct validity, and the psychometric properties of both questionnaires.

Results

Both questionnaires showed high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.85 and 0.89, respectively) and test–retest reliability, expressed by the Intra-Class Correlation Coefficient (ICC = 0.89 and 0.80 respectively). The standard error of measurement, group smallest real difference and minimal detectable change for the IKDC-SF were 4.66, 9.13, and 12.91 points, and 3.64, 7.13, and 10.08 points for the TSK, respectively.

Conclusion

We demonstrated that the Hebrew version of the IKDC-SF and TSK is reliable and valid for assessing QoL, function, and kinesiophobia among people experiencing chronic knee pain.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Turkiewicz A, Gerhardsson de Verdier M, Engström G et al (2015) Prevalence of knee pain and knee OA in southern Sweden and the proportion that seeks medical care. Rheumatology (Oxford) 54:827–835. https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/keu409

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rathleff MS, Rathleff CR, Olesen JL et al (2016) Is knee pain during adolescence a self-limiting condition? Prognosis of patellofemoral pain and other types of knee pain. Am J Sports Med 44:1165–1171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546515622456

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Jinks C, Jordan K, Croft P (2002) Measuring the population impact of knee pain and disability with the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities OSTEOARTHRITIS INDEX (WOMAC). Pain 100:55–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-3959(02)00239-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bindawas SM, Vennu V, Al Snih S (2015) Differences in health-related quality of life among subjects with frequent bilateral or unilateral knee pain: data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative study. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 45:128–136. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2015.5123

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim W, Jin YS, Lee CS et al (2015) Influence of knee pain and low back pain on the quality of life in adults older than 50 years of age. PM R 7:955–961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmrj.2015.03.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rathleff MS, Holden S, Straszek CL et al (2019) Five-year prognosis and impact of adolescent knee pain: a prospective population-based cohort study of 504 adolescents in Denmark. BMJ Open 9:e024113. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024113

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Tichonova A, Rimdeikienė I, Petruševičienė D et al (2016) The relationship between pain catastrophizing, kinesiophobia and subjective knee function during rehabilitation following anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction and meniscectomy: a pilot study. Medicina (Kaunas) 52:229–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.medici.2016.07.005

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hefti F, Müller W, Jakob RP et al (1993) Evaluation of knee ligament injuries with the IKDC form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 1:226–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01560215

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Çelik D, Coşkunsu D, KiliÇoğlu Ö et al (2014) Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form into Turkish. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 44:899–909. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2014.4865

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fu S-N, Chan Y-H (2011) Translation and validation of Chinese version of International knee documentation committee subjective knee form. Disabil Rehabil 33:1186–1189. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2010.524274

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Metsavaht L, Leporace G, Riberto M et al (2010) Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Brazilian version of the International knee documentation committee subjective knee form: validity and reproducibility. Am J Sports Med 38:1894–1899. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546510365314

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tigerstrand Grevnerts H, Grävare Silbernagel K, Sonesson S et al (2017) Translation and testing of measurement properties of the Swedish version of the IKDC subjective knee form. Scand J Med Sci Sports 27:554–562. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12861

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Franciozi CE, Ambra LF, Albertoni LJB et al (2019) Anteromedial tibial tubercle osteotomy improves results of medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction for recurrent patellar instability in patients with tibial tuberosity-trochlear groove distance of 17 to 20 mm. Arthroscopy 35:566–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2018.10.109

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Magnitskaya N, Mouton C, Gokeler A et al (2020) Younger age and hamstring tendon graft are associated with higher IKDC 2000 and KOOS scores during the first year after ACL reconstruction. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 28:823–832. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05516-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Riboh JC, Saltzman BM, Yanke AB et al (2016) Effect of leukocyte concentration on the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis. Am J Sports Med 44:792–800. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546515580787

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Grevnerts HT, Terwee CB, Kvist J (2015) The measurement properties of the IKDC-subjective knee form. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:3698–3706. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3283-z

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Luque-Suarez A, Martinez-Calderon J, Falla D (2019) Role of kinesiophobia on pain, disability and quality of life in people suffering from chronic musculoskeletal pain: a systematic review. Br J Sports Med 53:554–559. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2017-098673

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. de Oliveira Silva D, Barton CJ, Briani RV et al (2019) Kinesiophobia, but not strength is associated with altered movement in women with patellofemoral pain. Gait Posture 68:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2018.10.033

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Miller RP, Kori SH, Todd DD (1991) The tampa scale: a measure of kinesiophobia. Clin J Pain 7:51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Areeudomwong P, Buttagat V (2017) Reliability and validity of the cross-culturally adapted thai version of the tampa scale for kinesiophobia in knee osteoarthritis patients. Malays J Med Sci. 24:61–67. https://doi.org/10.21315/mjms2017.24.2.8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Huang H, Nagao M, Arita H et al (2019) Reproducibility, responsiveness and validation of the tampa scale for kinesiophobia in patients with ACL injuries. Health Qual Life Outcomes 17:150. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-019-1217-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL et al (2012) COSMIN checklist manual. University Medical Center, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL 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. Qual Life Res 19:539–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9606-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Amir M, Lewin-Epstein N, Becker G et al (2002) Psychometric properties of the SF-12 (Hebrew Version) in a primary care population in Israel. Med Care 40:918–928

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Wigler I, Neumann L, Yaron M (1999) Validation study of a Hebrew version of WOMAC in patients with osteoarthritis of the knee. Clin Rheumatol 18:402–405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s100670050126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F et al (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25:3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR et al (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dancey C, Reidy J (2017) Statistics without maths for psychology, 7th eds. Pearson education

  29. Portney LG (2020) Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Evidence-Based Practice. Fourth, FA Davis

    Google Scholar 

  30. Mokkink LB, Prinsen CA, Patrick DL et al (2018) COSMIN methodology for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Quality life Res. 27(5):1147–1157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Haverkamp D, Sierevelt IN, Breugem SJM et al (2006) Translation and validation of the Dutch version of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med 34:1680–1684. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546506288854

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Padua R, Bondi R, Ceccarelli E et al (2004) Italian version of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form: cross-cultural adaptation and validation. Arthroscopy 20:819–823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2004.06.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL et al (2001) Development and validation of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med 29:600–613. https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465010290051301

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Irrgang JJ, Anderson AF, Boland AL et al (2006) Responsiveness of the international knee documentation committee subjective knee form. Am J Sports Med 34:1567–1573. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546506288855

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. van Meer BL, Meuffels DE, Vissers MM et al (2013) Knee injury and Osteoarthritis outcome score or international knee documentation committee subjective knee form: which questionnaire is most useful to monitor patients with an anterior cruciate ligament rupture in the short term? Arthroscopy 29:701–715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2012.12.015

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Askary-Ashtiani A, Ebrahimi-Takamejani I, Torkaman G et al (2014) Reliability and validity of the Persian versions of the fear avoidance beliefs questionnaire and tampa scale of kinesiophobia in patients with neck pain. Spine 39:E1095–E1102. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000438

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Cai L, Liu Y, Woby SR et al (2019) Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the chinese version of the tampa scale for kinesiophobia-11 among patients who have undergone total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 34:1116–1121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2019.01.076

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Gómez-Pérez L, López-Martínez AE, Ruiz-Párraga GT (2011) Psychometric properties of the spanish version of the tampa scale for kinesiophobia (TSK). J Pain 12:425–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2010.08.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Haugen AJ, Grøvle L, Keller A et al (2008) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Norwegian version of the tampa scale for kinesiophobia. Spine 33:E595-601. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31817c6c4b

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Monticone M, Giorgi I, Baiardi P et al (2010) Development of the Italian version of the tampa scale of kinesiophobia (TSK-I): cross-cultural adaptation, factor analysis, reliability, and validity. Spine 35:1241–1246. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181bfcbf6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. de Souza FS, Da Marinho CS, Siqueira FB et al (2008) Psychometric testing confirms that the Brazilian-Portuguese adaptations, the original versions of the fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire, and the tampa scale of kinesiophobia have similar measurement properties. Spine 33:1028–1033. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31816c8329

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Yangui N, Yahia A, Ghroubi S et al (2017) Translation and validation of the tampa scale of kinesiophobia Arabic version in chronic low back pain. Ann Phys Rehabil Med 60:e20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rehab.2017.07.145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Ostelo RWJG, Swinkels-Meewisse IJCM, Knol DL et al (2007) Assessing pain and pain-related fear in acute low back pain: what is the smallest detectable change? Int J Behav Med 14:242–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03002999

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received for conducting this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel

    Tomer Yona & Arielle G. Fischer

  2. Department of Pediatric Orthopaedics, Dana-Dwek Children’s Hospital, Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Moshe Yaniv

  3. Sportopedia - Clinic & More, Tel-Aviv, Israel

    Moshe Yaniv & Jonathan Rom

  4. DM Physiotherapy and Medical Center, Beer-Sheva, Israel

    Elad Damri

Authors
  1. Tomer Yona
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Moshe Yaniv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jonathan Rom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elad Damri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Arielle G. Fischer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Tomer Yona or Arielle G. Fischer.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the ethical committee of the Technion, Israel Institute of Technology (Number: 111–2021).

Informed consent

All of the participants in this study provided informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1. The Hebrew Version of The International Knee Documentation Committee Subjective Knee Form

Appendix 2. The Hebrew Version of The Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yona, T., Yaniv, M., Rom, J. et al. Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and reliability of the International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) subjective knee form and the tampa scale for kinesiophobia (TSK) into Hebrew. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 143, 2629–2640 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-022-04548-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-022-04548-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation