The aim of our study was to develop a Dutch version of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire (FHSQ-NL) and evaluate its measurement properties according to the COSMIN definition (COnsensus‐based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments). After translation of the FSHQ, a group of 119 randomly selected patient who visited the outpatient clinic for conditions affecting the foot and ankle were asked to participate, of which103 patients were included in the analysis. The FHSQ-NL, a validated Dutch FAOS and a visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain and function were used in this study as outcomes measures. Reliability was assessed by calculating intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), internal consistency by Cronbach's alpha, and the smallest detectable change (SDC). Construct validity was evaluated by use of a priori hypotheses concerning Spearman's correlation coefficient between FHSQ subscales and FAOS and VAS. All domains of the FHSQ-NL, besides ‘General health,’ indicated good internal consistency with a Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.61 to 0.91. Test-retest reliability of all FHSQ domains was poor with an ICC ranging from 0.47 to 0.77. At individual level, the SDC ranged from 35.1 to 60.6 and at a group level (n = 50) from 5.0 to 8.6. Construct validity was supported by confirmation of 75% of all a priori hypotheses. The FHSQ-NL has good internal consistency and smallest detectable change (SDC) at group level. However, reliability and SDC on individual level show suboptimal results. Therefore, the questionnaire is more suitable for evaluating foot complaints at group level instead of individual level.
Level of Clinical Evidence
Abbreviations:FHSQ (Foot Health Status Questionnaire), ICC (Intra-class correlation coefficient), SDC (Smallest detectable change), FAOS (Foot Ankle Outcome Score), VAS (Visual analogue scale)
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 access
One-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 Surgery
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- Analysis of clinical grading scales for the foot and ankle.Foot Ankle Int. 1997; 18: 443-446
- Clinical rating systems for the ankle-hindfoot, midfoot, hallux, and lesser toes.Foot ankle Int. 1994; 15: 349-353https://doi.org/10.1177/107110079401500701
- The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.Med Care. 1992; 30: 473-483
- Validation of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score for Ankle Ligament.Foot Ankle Int. 2001; 22: 788-794
- Post-traumatic ankle osteoarthritis: quality of life, frequency and associated factors.Muscles Ligaments Tendons J. 2019; 9: 363-371
- Development and validation of a questionnaire designed to measure Foot-Health Status.J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1998; 88: 419-428
- Brazilian version of the foot health status adaptation and evaluation of measurement properties.Clinics. 2008; 63: 595-600https://doi.org/10.1590/S1807-59322008000500005
- Translation and cultural adaptation of a Danish version of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire for individuals with plantar heel pain.Foot (Edinb). 2019; 38: 61-64https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foot.2019.01.001
- Translation, transcultural adaptation to Spanish, to Valencian language of the Foot Health Status Questionnaire.Rev española cirugía ortopédica y Traumatol. 2010; 54 ((English Ed.): 211-219https://doi.org/10.1016/S1988-8856(10)70235-2
- Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for Patient-Reported Outcomes (PRO) measures : report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation.Value Heal. 2005; 8: 94-104
- Validation of the Dutch language version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score.Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc. 2014; 23: 2413-2419https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3017-2
- Evaluation of the Dutch version of the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS): Responsiveness and Minimally Important Change.Knee Surg Sport Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016; 24: 1339-1347https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-015-3941-9
- The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes.J Clin Epidemiol. 2010; 63: 737-745https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.02.006
- Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests.Psychometrika. 1951; 16: 297-334
- Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires.J Clin Epidemiol. 2007; 60: 34-42https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012
- When to use agreement versus reliability measures.J Clin Epidemiol. 2006; 59: 1033-1039https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.10.015
- Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use.2nd (Ed). Oxford University Press, New York2008
- Quantifying test-retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM.J Strength Cond Res. 2005; 19: 231-240
- Changes to the subscales of two vision-related quality of life questionnaires are proposed.J Clin Epidemiol. 2005; 58: 1260-1268https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.04.007
- Minimal changes in health status questionnaires : distinction between minimally detectable change and minimally important change.Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006; 54: 3-7https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-4-54
- Validation of Foot and Ankle Outcome Score for Hallux Valgus.Foot Ankle Int. 2012; 33: 1145-1155https://doi.org/10.3113/FAI.2012.1145
- 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. 2010; 19: 539-549https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9606-8
Published online: March 31, 2022
Declarations of Interest: None.
Financial Disclosure: None reported.
This study was approved by the institutional review board (IRB number 2018.28, Spaarne Gasthuis, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands) and informed consent was obtained of all included patients.
© 2022 by the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons. All rights reserved.