Abstract
The present study tested the reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the
visual analog scale foot and ankle (VAS-FA) among healthy subjects and patients with
foot problems. A total of 128 participants, 65 healthy subjects and 63 patients with
foot problems, were evaluated. The VAS-FA was translated into Turkish and administered
to the 128 subjects on 2 separate occasions with a 5-day interval. The test–retest
reliability and internal consistency were assessed with the intraclass correlation
coefficient and Cronbach's α. The validity was assessed using the correlations with
Turkish versions of the Foot Function Index, the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score, and
the Short-Form 36-item Health Survey. A statistically significant difference was found
between the healthy group and the patient group in the overall score and subscale
scores of the VAS-FA (p < .001). The internal consistency of the VAS-FA was very good, and the test–retest
reliability was excellent. Adequate to good correlations were found between the overall
VAS-FA score and the Foot Function Index, Foot and Ankle Outcome Score, and Short-Form
36-item Health Survey scores in the healthy and patient groups both. The Turkish version
of the VAS-FA is sensitive enough to distinguish foot and ankle-specific pathologic
conditions from asymptomatic conditions. The Turkish version of the VAS-FA is a reliable
and valid method and can be used for foot-related problems.
Level of Clinical Evidence
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to The Journal of Foot and Ankle SurgeryAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Regional musculoskeletal conditions: foot and ankle disorders.Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2003; 17: 87-111
- Prevalence and correlates of foot pain in a population-based study: the North West Adelaide health study.J Foot Ankle Res. 2008; 1: 2
- Impact of multiple joint problems on daily living tasks in people in the community over age fifty-five.Arthritis Rheum. 2006; 55: 757-764
- The effect of disease site (knee, hip, hand, foot, lower back or neck) on employment reduction due to osteoarthritis.PLoS One. 2010; 5: e10470
- Associations of region-specific foot pain and foot biomechanics: the Framingham foot study.J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2015; 70: 1281-1288
- The top 10 things foot and ankle specialists wish every primary care physician knew.Mayo Clin Proc. 2006; 81: 818-822
Evaluation of the validity of the Foot Function Index. Presented at the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) 21st Annual Summer Meeting, July 15–17, Boston, MA, 2005.
- Developing performance and assessment platforms in foot and ankle surgery.Foot Ankle Int. 2016; 37: 670-679
- Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes.Foot Ankle Int. 1994; 15: 349-353
- International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF).WHO Library, Geneva2001
- Use of patient-reported outcome measures in foot and ankle research.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013; 95: e118
- A new foot and ankle outcome score: questionnaire based, subjective, visual-analogue-scale, validated and computerized.Foot Ankle Surg. 2006; 12: 191-199
- Visual analogue scale foot and ankle: validity and reliability of Thai version of the new outcome score in subjective form.J Med Assoc Thai. 2011; 94: 952-957
- Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures.Spine. 2000; 25: 3186-3191
- The Foot Function Index: a measure of foot pain and disability.J Clin Epidemiol. 1991; 44: 561-570
- Turkish translation and adaptation of Foot Function Index in patients with plantar fasciitis.Turk J Phys Med Rehab. 2014; 60: 212-222
- Validation of the foot and ankle outcome score for ankle ligament reconstruction.Foot Ankle Int. 2001; 22: 788-794
- Validation of the Turkish version of the foot and ankle outcome score.Rheumatol Int. 2009; 30: 169-173
- The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.Med Care. 1992; 30: 473-483
- Normative data and discriminative properties of short form 36 (SF-36) in Turkish urban population.BMC Public Health. 2006; 6: 247
- Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability.Psychol Bull. 1979; 86: 420-428
- Statistics notes: Cronbach's alpha.BMJ. 1997; 314: 572
- Functional rating index: a new valid and reliable instrument to measure the magnitude of clinical change in spinal conditions.Spine. 2001; 26: 78-87
- A survey of self-reported outcome instruments for the foot and ankle.J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2007; 37: 72-84
- Studies comparing numerical rating scales, verbal rating scales, and visual analogue scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review.J Pain Symptom Manage. 2011; 41: 1073-1093
- Normative data of the visual analogue scale foot and ankle (VAS FA) for pathological conditions.J Foot Ankle Surg. 2011; 17: 166-172
- Reliability and validity of the Taiwan Chinese version of the Foot Function Index.J Formos Med Assoc. 2008; 107: 111-122
Article info
Publication history
Published online: August 29, 2017
Footnotes
Financial Disclosure: None reported.
Conflict of Interest: None reported.
Identification
Copyright
© 2017 by the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons. All rights reserved.
