DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

한국어판 Balance Evaluation Systems Test의 번역 적합성 연구

A Study of Translation Conformity on Korean Version of a Balance Evaluation Systems Test

  • 전용진 (경동대학교 간호보건대학 물리치료학과) ;
  • 김경모 (대전보건대학교 물리치료학과)
  • Jeon, Yong-jin (Dept. of Physical Therapy, Nursing and Health College, Kyungdong University) ;
  • Kim, Gyoung-mo (Dept. of Physical Therapy, Daejeon Health Institute of Technology)
  • 투고 : 2018.01.05
  • 심사 : 2018.02.07
  • 발행 : 2018.02.19

초록

Background: The process of language translation, adaptation, and cross-cultural validation of tools for use in multiple countries requires the adoption of well-established, comprehensive, and rigorous methodological approaches. Back translation, which is the most recommended method, permits the detection of errors in the translation and the identification of words or phrases that cannot be accurately or literally translated. Objects: The aim of this study was to verify the content validity of a Korean version of a Balance Evaluation Systems test (BESTest) by using a back-translation method. Methods: This research was conducted in six steps: 1) translation of the BESTest into Korean, 2) evaluation of the translation conformity of Korean-translated BESTest, 3) evaluation of the degree of translation comprehension, 4) back translation of Korean BESTest, 5) evaluation of the technical and conceptual equivalence, and 6) completion of the Korean version of BESTest by the translation verification committee. Results: In this study, Korean version of the BESTest achieved a rating of more than 3 (moderate) for translation comprehension, and technical equivalence and conceptual equivalence of back translation were evaluated as 3 (moderate) or more. Conclusion: The Korean version of the BESTest has proven content validity and is an appropriate tool to measure balance function.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Berg K, Wood-Dauphinee S, Williams JI, et al. Measuring balance in the elderly: Preliminary development of an instrument. Physiother Can. 1989;41(6):304-311. https://doi.org/10.3138/ptc.41.6.304
  2. Brislin RW. Back translation for cross-cultural research. J Cross Cult Psychol. 1970;1(3):185-216. https://doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301
  3. Bullinger M, Alonso J, Apolone G, et al. Translating health status questionnaires and evaluating their quality: The IQOLA project approach. International quality of life assessment. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):913-923. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(98)00082-1
  4. Bullinger M, Anderson R, Cella D, et al. Developing and evaluating cross-cultural instruments from minimum requirements to optimal models. Qual Life Res. 1993;2(6):451-459. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00422219
  5. Candell GL, Hulin CL. Cross-language and cross-cultural comparisons in scale translation: Independent sources of information about item nonequivalence. J Cross Cult Psychol. 1986;17(4):417-440. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002186017004003
  6. Chae SY, Jo SJ, Kwon HC, et al. A study on a Korean-translated version of the psychosocial impact of assistive devices scale (PIADS). J Korean Soc Occup Ther. 2008;16(3):71-86.
  7. Custers JW, Hoijtink H. van der Net J, et al. Cultural differences in functional status measurement: Analyses of person fit according to the rasch model. Qual Life Res. 2000;9(5):571-578. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008949108089
  8. Custers JW, Wassenberg-Severijnen JE, Van der Net J, et al. Dutch adaptation and content validity of the ‘pediatric evaluation of disability inventory (PEDI)'. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24(5):250-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280110076036
  9. Darr N, Franjoine MR, Campbell SK, et al. Psychometric properties of the pediatric balance scale using rasch analysis. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2015;27(4):337-348. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0000000000000178.
  10. Duncan PW, Weiner DK, Chandler J, et al. Functional reach: A new clinical measure of balance. J Gerontol. 1990;45(6):M192-M197. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/45.6.M192
  11. Franjoine MR, Darr N, Held SL, et al. The performance of children developing typically on the pediatric balance scale. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2010;22(4):350-359. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0b013e3181f9d5eb
  12. Franjoine MR, Gunther JS, Taylor MJ. Pediatric balance scale: A modified version of the Berg balance scale for the school-age child with mild to moderate motor impairment. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2003;15(2):114-128. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.PEP.0000068117.48023.18
  13. Hall CD, Shubert MC, Herdman SJ. Prediction of fall risk reduction as measured by dynamic gait index in individuals with unilateral vestibular hypofunction. Otol Neurotol. 2004;25(5):746-751. https://doi.org/10.1097/00129492-200409000-00017
  14. Horak FB, Wrisley DM, Frank J. The balance evaluation systems test (BESTest) to differentiate balance deficits. Phys Ther. 2009;89(5):484-498. https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20080071
  15. Hulin CL, Drasgow F, Komocar J. Applications of item response theory to analysis of attitude scale translations. J Appl Psychol. 1982;67(6):818-825. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.67.6.818
  16. Huxham FE, Goldie PA, Patla AE. Theoretical considerations in balance assessment. Aust J Physiother. 2001;47(2):89-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-9514(14)60300-7
  17. Jones PS, Lee JW, Philips LR, et al. An adaptation of brislin's translation model for cross-cultural research. Nurs Res. 2001;50(5):300-304. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006199-200109000-00008
  18. Kembhavi G, Darrah J, Magill-Evans J, et al. Using the Berg balance scale to distinguish balance abilities in children with cerebral palsy. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2002;14(2):92-99. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001577-200214020-00005
  19. Kim AY, Lim EY. Effects of different types of practice in cross-cultural test adaptation of affective measures. Kor J Psychol.:Gen. 2003;22(1):89-113.
  20. Ku JH, Park DW, Kim Sw, et al. Cross-cultural differences for adapting translated five-item version of international index of erectile function: Results of a Korean study. Urology. 2005;65(6):1179-1182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2004.12.052
  21. Langley FA, Mackintosh SFH. Functional balance assessment of older community dwelling adults: A systematic review of the literature. Internal J Appl Health Sci Pract. 2007;5(4):1-11.
  22. Lee AH, Park HS, Ahn IS, et al. A study on a Korean-translated version of the cognitive failures questionnaire. J Korean Acad Occup Ther. 2011;19(4):117-129.
  23. Lim YJ, Park KY, Yoo EY. Pilot study to establish content validity of a Korean-translated version of a sensory profile. J Korean Acad Occup Ther. 2007;15(2):25-42.
  24. McDermott MA, Palchanes K. A process for translating and testing a quantitative measure for cross-cultural nursing research. J N Y State Nurses Assoc. 1992;23(4):12-15.
  25. Neuman A, Greenberg DF, Labovitz DR, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation of the sensory profile: Establishing linguistic equivalency of the hebrew version. Occup Ther Int. 2004;11(2):112-130. https://doi.org/10.1002/oti.201
  26. Newton RA. Balance screening of an inner city older adult population. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78(6):587-591. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-9993(97)90423-8
  27. Norris RA, Wilder E, Norton J. The functional reach test in 3- to 5-year-old children without disabilities. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2008;20(1):47-52. https://doi.org/10.1097/PEP.0b013e31815ce63f
  28. Rodrigues LC, Marques AP, Barros PB, et al. Reliability of the balance evaluation systems test (BESTest) and BESTest sections for adults with hemiparesis. Braz J Phys Ther. 2014;18(3):276-281. https://doi.org/10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0033
  29. Rose DJ, Lucchese N, Wiersma LD. Development of a multidimensional balance scale for use with functionally independent older adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87(11):1478-1485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2006.07.263
  30. Saether R, Helbostad JL, Riphagen II, et al. Clinical tools to assess balance in children and adults with cerebral palsy: A systematic review. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013;55(11):988-999. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.12162
  31. Sechrest L, Fay TL, Zaidi SMH. Problems of translation in cross-cultural research. J Cross Cult Psychol. 1972;3(1):41-56. https://doi.org/10.1177/002202217200300103
  32. Son WS. A comprehensive approach for adapting psychological tests. Korean Psychology. 2003;22(2):57-80.
  33. Sperber AD. Translation and validation of study instruments for cross-cultural research. Gastroenterology. 2004;126(1):S124-S128. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2003.10.016
  34. Verbecque E, Lobo Da Costa PH, Vereeck L, et al. Psychometric properties of functional balance tests in children: A literature review. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2015;57(6):521-529. https://doi.org/10.1111/dmcn.12657
  35. Williams EN, Carroll SG, Reddihough DS, et al. Investigation of the timed 'up & go' test in children. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2005;47(8):518-524. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0012162205001027
  36. Yoo SL. Translating and validating questionnaires for physical education research. The Journal of Education. 2003;22:203-217.