An important tool in lymphedema management: validation of Turkish version of the lymphedema breast cancer questionnaire

DOĞAN H., ABAKAY H., Guc A., Karaca H.

DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION, cilt.44, sa.21, ss.6424-6431, 2022 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 44 Sayı: 21
  • Basım Tarihi: 2022
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1080/09638288.2021.1963852
  • Dergi Adı: DISABILITY AND REHABILITATION
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, ASSIA, AgeLine, CINAHL, Educational research abstracts (ERA), EMBASE, Linguistics & Language Behavior Abstracts, MEDLINE, Psycinfo, Public Affairs Index, SportDiscus, Violence & Abuse Abstracts
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.6424-6431
  • Anahtar Kelimeler: Lymphedema, diagnosis, symptoms, validity, Lymphedema Breast Cancer Questionnaire, CROSS-CULTURAL ADAPTATION, RELIABILITY, VALIDITY, DISABILITY, SHOULDER, ARM
  • Yozgat Bozok Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet

Özet

Purpose This study aimed to perform the psychometric evaluation of the Turkish version of the Lymphedema and Breast Cancer Questionnaire (LBCQ). Methods Patients with BCRL (n = 50) received a Turkish version of the following measurement tools: Lymphedema Functioning, Disability, and Health Questionnaire (Lymph-ICF), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (Quick DASH), LBCQ and Upper Extremity Functional Index (UEFI-20). Patients without BCRL (n = 50) completed only the Turkish LBCQ. Psychometric properties were analyzed with internal consistency, test-retest reliability, ROC analysis, criterion, and discriminant validity. Results The internal consistency of the Turkish LBCQ was strong (Cronbach's alpha coefficient >0.60). Test-retest reliability was also very strong (intraclass correlation coefficients from 0.79 to 1; p < 0.001). Criterion validity was supported by a moderate correlation of LBCQ with volumetric measurement, skinfold thickness, and questionnaires (Lymph-ICF, UEFI, and Quick DASH) (p < 0.05) via the ROC analysis, the cut-off point was found as "6" in distinguishing individuals with lymphedema and those without. There were significant differences in LBCQ total and subscale scores between participants with and without BCRL (p < 0.05). Conclusions This study clinically confirmed the validity, reliability, and applicability of the Turkish LBCQ in the Turkish population. LBCQ will enable the early detection of lymphedema and will save the country financially with early diagnosis.