Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of a Norwegian version of the Goodman Satisfaction Score (GSS-NO) for patients with total hip and knee arthroplasty
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2024.42703Keywords:
Arthroplasty, Hip, Knee, Satisfaction, ValidationAbstract
Background and purpose: Measuring patient satisfaction after total hip (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is important. We aimed to cross-culturally adapt and examine the psychometric properties of the self-reported Goodman Satisfaction Score (GSS) in a sample of Norwegian patients following primary THA and TKA.
Methods: The GSS was translated and adapted into Norwegian (GSS-NO) following standard guidelines. 800 patients from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register who had undergone surgery 6–11 months prior were invited to complete GSS-NO and questions on sociodemographic factors, pain, and function in a cross-sectional study. We examined validity in relation to internal structure, response processes, and precision using Rasch analysis, relationships between the GSS-NO and pain and function using Pearson’s correlation coefficients, and test–retest reliability using linear weighted kappa statistics.
Results: The GSS-NO was adapted with few challenges. 404 patients (49% THA, 51% TKA) returned complete answers. The GSS-NO met all criteria regarding the rating scale functioning. Local independence among items and unidimensionality was supported and there was acceptable goodness-of-fit. The internal consistency was 0.94. We found no systematic differential item functioning by age, sex, work status, education, cohabitation status, or hip or knee surgery. The correlation coefficients between GSS-NO and pain and function outcomes were 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76–0.82) and 0.79 (CI 0.76–0.82), respectively. Test–retest reliability with weighted kappa ranged from 0.43–0.55 for THA and 0.54–0.81 for TKA.
Conclusion: The cross-cultural adaptation of GSS-NO proved to be a valid and reliable measure for use in Norwegian-speaking patients following primary THA and TKA.
Downloads
References
Graham B, Green A, James M, Katz J, Swiontkowski M. Measuring patient satisfaction in orthopaedic surgery. JBJS 2015; 97(1): 80-4. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.N.00811. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00811
Kahlenberg CA, Nwachukwu B U, McLawhorn A S, Cross M B, Cornell C N, Padgett D E. Patient satisfaction after total knee replacement: a systematic review. HSS J 2018; 14(2): 192-201. doi: 10.1007/s11420-018-9614-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11420-018-9614-8
Goodman S M, Mehta B Y, Kahlenberg C A, Krell E C, Nguyen J, Finik J, et al. Assessment of a satisfaction measure for use after primary total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2020; 35(7): 1792-9. e4. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2020.02.039 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2020.02.039
Beaton D E, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz M B. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000; 25(24): 3186-91. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
Brañes J, Barahona M, Carvajal S, Wulf R, Barrientos C. Validation of the Spanish version of the Goodman score in total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Surg Res 2021; 16(1): 517. doi: 10.1186/s13018-021-02653-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-021-02653-6
Ulivi M, Orlandini L, Meroni V, Viganò M, D’Errico M, Perrotta R, et al. Italian translation, adaptation, and validation of the novel satisfaction measure assessment after primary total joint arthroplasty: the Goodman Score Questionnaire. Healthcare 2022; 10(5): 769. doi: 10.3390/healthcare10050769. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10050769
Gagnier J J, Lai J, Mokkink L B, Terwee C B. COSMIN reporting guideline for studies on measurement properties of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res 2021; 30(8): 2197-218. doi: 10.1007/s11136-021-02822-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-021-02822-4
Furnes O, Hallan G, Hole R, Dybvik E, Stenvik S, Fenstad A M. Norwegian Arthroplasty Register – Yearly report 2022. Available from: https://www.kvalitetsregistre.no/register/muskel-og-skjelett/nasjonalt-register-leddproteser
Bellamy N, Buchanan W W, Goldsmith C H, Campbell J, Stitt L W. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 1988; 15(12): 1833-40.
Giesinger J M, Hamilton D F, Jost B, Behrend H, Giesinger K. WOMAC, EQ-5D and Knee Society Score thresholds for treatment success after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2015; 30(12): 2154-8. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.06.01211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.06.012
Bond T. Applying the Rasch model: fundamental measurement in the human sciences. New York: Routledge; 2015. doi: 10.4324/9781315814698. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315814698
Linacre J M. Winsteps® Rasch measurement computer program (Version 5.6.0). Portland, OR: Winsteps.com; 2023.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education. The standards for educational and psychological testing 2014. Available from: https://www.apa.org/science/programs/testing/standards
Yen W M. Obtaining maximum likelihood trait estimates from number–correct scores for the three–parameter logistic model. JEM 1984; 21(2): 93-111. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1984.tb00223.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1984.tb00223.x
Linacre J M. Local independence and residual covariance: a study of Olympic figure skating ratings. J Appl Meas 2009; 10(2): 157-69.
Wright B, Linacre J, Gustafson J, Martin-Lof P. Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Meas Trans 1994; 8(3): 370.
Lerdal A, Kottorp A, Gay C, Aouizerat B E, Lee K A, Miaskowski C. A Rasch analysis of assessments of morning and evening fatigue in oncology patients using the Lee Fatigue Scale. J Pain Symptom Manage 2016; 51(6): 1002-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2015.12.331. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2015.12.331
Smith R, Miao C. Assessing unidimensionality for Rasch measurement. Objective Measurement: Theory into Practice 1994; 2: 316-27.
Hällgren M, Nygård L, Kottorp A. Technology and everyday functioning in people with intellectual disabilities: a Rasch analysis of the Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire (ETUQ). J Intellect Disabil Res 2011; 55(6): 610-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01419.x. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01419.x
Mallinson T, Stelmack J, Velozo C. A comparison of the separation ratio and coefficient α in the creation of minimum item sets. Med Care 2004; 42(1 Suppl): I17-24. doi: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000103522.78233.c3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.mlr.0000103522.78233.c3
Anselmi P, Colledani D, Robusto E. A comparison of classical and modern measures of internal consistency. Front Psychol 2019; 10:2714. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02714 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02714
Hagquist C, Andrich D. Recent advances in analysis of differential item functioning in health research using the Rasch model. Health Quality Life Outcomes 2017; 15: 1-8. doi: 10.1186/s12955-017-0755-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0755-0
Mukaka M M. A guide to appropriate use of correlation coefficient in medical research. Malawi Med J 2012; 24(3): 69-71.
Altman D G. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall; 1991. doi: 10.1201/9780429258589. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429258589
Bourne R B, Chesworth B M, Davis A M, Mahomed N N, Charron K D J. Patient satisfaction after total knee arthroplasty: who is satisfied and who is not? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2010; 468(1): 57-63. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-1119-926. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-1119-9
Ring D, Leopold S S. Editorial-measuring satisfaction: can it be done? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2015; 473(10): 3071-3. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4485-5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-015-4485-5
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Ingvild Buset Bergvad , Anders Kottorp, Arild Aamodt, Anners Lerdal, Søren T Skou, Maren Falch Lindberg
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
