Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 30, 2025
Validation of a Psychosocial Intervention on Body Image in Older People: An Experimental Design
Published on: May 31, 2021
Are Patient-Reported Outcome Measures for Distal Radius Fractures Validated for Spanish and Culture? A Systematic
Jacie Lemos1, Michelle Xiao1, Luis Miguel Castro Appiani2
1VOICES Health Policy Research Center, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University, Redwood City, CA.
Purpose:
Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used commonly to assess function to direct treatment and evaluate outcomes for patients with distal radius fractures. Most PROMs have been developed and validated in English with minimal report of the demographics of patients studied. The validity of applying these PROMs among Spanish-speaking patients is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality and psychometric properties of Spanish-language adaptations of PROMs for distal radius fractures.
Methods:
We conducted a systematic review to identify published studies of adaptations of Spanish-language PROMs evaluating patients with distal radius fractures. We evaluated the methodologic quality of the adaptation and validation using Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures, Quality Criteria for Psychometric Properties of Health Status Questionnaire, and the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments Checklist for Cross-Cultural Validity. The level of evidence was evaluated based upon prior methodology.
Results:
Five instruments reported in eight studies were included: the Patient-Rated Wrist Evaluation (PRWE), Disability of Arm Shoulder and Hand, Upper Limb Functional Index, Lawton Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Scale, and Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment. The PRWE was the most frequently included PROM. No study followed all six processes for adaptation or assessed all measurement properties. No study demonstrated the completion of more than eight of the 14 aspects of cross-cultural validity. The PRWE had moderate evidence to support half of the domains of measurement properties evaluating the level of evidence.
Conclusions:
None of the five instruments identified received a good rating on all three checklists. Only the PWRE demonstrated moderate evidence on half of the measurement domains.
Clinical Relevance:
Given the lack of strong evidence to support the quality of these instruments, we recommend adaptation and testing of PROMs for this population before use. Currently, PROMs in Spanish-speaking patients should be used with caution so as not to perpetuate health care disparities.
