Email Alerts
RSS
Volume 37 Issue 10
Oct.  2021
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Article Navigation >  CHINESE JOURNAL OF BURNS AND WOUNDS  > 2021  >  37(10): 978-986
Zhang J,Chai XJ,Guan LF,et al.Sinicization, cross-cultural adjustment and reliability and validity test of the Burnt Hand Outcome Tool[J].Chin J Burns,2021,37(10):978-986.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501120-20210201-00042.
Citation: Zhang J,Chai XJ,Guan LF,et al.Sinicization, cross-cultural adjustment and reliability and validity test of the Burnt Hand Outcome Tool[J].Chin J Burns,2021,37(10):978-986.DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501120-20210201-00042.
shu

Sinicization, cross-cultural adjustment and reliability and validity test of the Burnt Hand Outcome Tool

doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn501120-20210201-00042

  • Burns and Plastic Surgery Department, General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University, Yinchuan 750004, China

Funds:

Natural Science Foundation of Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region of China NZ17152

More Information
  • Corresponding author: Chai Xuejun, Email: 1374280614@qq.com
  • Received Date: 2021-02-01
    Abstract
  •   Objective  To introduce the Burnt Hand Outcome Tool (BHOT) into China to conduct sinicization, cross-cultural debugging, and test the reliability and validity, thus provide a reference for the evaluation of treatment effect and making of medical decisions of hand burn patients.  Methods  The cross-sectional research was conducted. After obtaining the authorization of the original author, the Brislin translation mode was used to literally translate, synthesize, back-translate, and be checked by experts to form the Chinese version of BHOT (C-BHOT) 2. Ten experts in the field of burn rescue and treatment were invited by purpose sampling method to conduct cross-cultural debugging to form C-BHOT 3. A total of 21 hand burn patients who were treated in General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University from January to March 2020 and conformed to the inclusion criteria were selected by accidental sampling method for pre-testing. Then the final version of C-BHOT 4 was formed. Hospitalized patients who met the selection criteria were recruited using accidental sampling, multi-site and cross-regional survey method from May 2020 to March 2021 in General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University, the First Affiliated Hospital of Air Force Medical University, the First Affiliated Hospital of Army Medical University (the Third Military Medical University), and the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. The survey was performed with the general information questionnaire and C-BHOT 4. Critical ratio method and correlation coefficient method were used for item analysis, Cronbach's α coefficient test tool was used to test internal consistency, test-retest reliability was used to judge the stability of the tool, content validity index analysis tool was used to analyze the content validity, and exploratory factor analysis was used to test the validity of the structure. Data were statistically analyzed with independent sample t test or Pearson correlation analysis.  Results  After the sinicization, cross-cultural debugging, and pre-testing, C-BHOT 4 was formed with a total of 20 items. All items were adjusted to positive scoring, and 7 modifications were made on the basis of the original tool. A total of 353 questionnaires were issued in the formal survey, and 344 valid questionnaires were returned, with an effective response rate of 97.45%. In the 344 patients, there were more male patients (297 patients) than female patients (47 patients), with ages of 23 to 57 years. The critical ratios of each item in the item analysis ranged from 5.48 to 12.59 (P<0.05). There were statistically significant differences in the scores between patients in high-score group and low-score group (t=-10.72--2.84, P<0.05 or P<0.01). There was significant positive relationship among the scores of each two items and between scores of each item and the overall tool score (r=0.68-0.71, 0.47-0.63, P<0.05 or P<0.01). In reliability test, the Cronbach's α coefficient of the whole tool was 0.837, and the test-retest reliability was 0.702-0.793. In validity test, the content validity index of whole tool was 0.923. The exploratory factor analysis extracted 3 common factors, and the cumulative variance contribution rate was 76.162%. The comparative fit index in the confirmatory factor analysis was 0.924.  Conclusions  After the BHOT tool being sinicized, cross-culturally debugged, pre-tested, and tested for reliability and validity, it was verified that C-BHOT 4 has good reliability and validity in assessing the outcome of Chinese hand burn patients, and therefore can be used as an effective tool for the evaluation.

     

    • FullText(HTML)
  • loading
    • References(32)
  • [1]
    王佳佳,谢洋,李建生.临床结局测评工具修订的现状及流程思考:以慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者报告结局量表修订为例[J].中国全科医学,2020,23(29):3644-3648.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2020.00.360.DOI:10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2020.00.360.
    [2]
    李立群,王建宁,詹梦梅,等.快速反应系统对住院患者临床结局影响的系统评价再评价[J].中国护理管理,2019,19(6):850-856.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1756.2019.06.010.
    [3]
    皋文君,袁长蓉.患者自我报告结局测量信息系统在国外的应用进展[J].中华护理杂志,2018,53(11):1401-1405.DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2018.11.026.
    [4]
    ZiolkowskiNI, PusicAL, FishJS, et al. Psychometric findings for the SCAR-Q patient-reported outcome measure based on 731 children and adults with surgical, traumatic, and burn scars from four countries[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg,2020,146(3):331e-338e. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000007078.
    [5]
    杨苏,黄丽华.患者自我报告结局在慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者中的应用进展[J].中华护理杂志, 2020,55(5):716-720. DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2020.05.015.
    [6]
    BroderickJE, MayM, SchwartzJE, et al. Patient reported outcomes can improve performance status assessment: a pilot study[J]. J Patient Rep Outcomes,2019,3(1):41. DOI: 10.1186/s41687-019-0136-z.
    [7]
    王秀蓓,王海芳,钮美娥,等. 癌症患者报告结局的研究进展[J].中国护理管理,2018, 18(3): 423-427. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1756.2018.03.031.
    [8]
    RuseckaiteR, MaharajAD, KrysinskaK, et al. Developing a preliminary conceptual framework for guidelines on inclusion of patient reported-outcome measures (PROMs) in clinical quality registries[J]. Patient Relat Outcome Meas,2019,10:355-372.DOI: 10.2147/PROM.S229569.
    [9]
    KnightA, WasiakJ, SalwayJ, et al. Factors predicting health status and recovery of hand function after hand burns in the second year after hospital discharge[J]. Burns, 2017,43(1):100-106. DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2016.07.025.
    [10]
    LegemateCM, SpronkI, MokkinkLB, et al. Evaluation of measurement properties of health-related quality of life instruments for burns: a systematic review[J]. J Trauma Acute Care Surg,2020,88(4):555-571.DOI: 10.1097/TA.0000000000002584.
    [11]
    GriffithsC, Armstrong-JamesL, WhiteP, et al. A systematic review of patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) used in child and adolescent burn research[J]. Burns,2015,41(2):212-224. DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2014.07.018.
    [12]
    GriffithsC. Guest E, Pickles T,et al. The development and validation of the CARe Burn Scale-Adult Form: a Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) to assess quality of life for adults living with a burn injury[J].J Burn Care Res,2019,40(3):312-326.DOI: 10.1093/jbcr/irz021.
    [13]
    Mc KittrickA,GustafssonL,MarshallK.A systematic review to investigate outcome tools currently in use for those with hand burns, and mapping psychometric properties of outcome measures[J].Burns,2021,47(2):295-314.DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2020.07.009.
    [14]
    TangD, Li-TsangCWP, AuRKC, et al. Predictors of functional independence, quality of life, and return to work in patients with burn injuries in mainland China[J/OL].Burns Trauma,2016,4:32[2020-12-04].https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27826591/. DOI: 10.1186/s41038-016-0058-4.
    [15]
    BacheSE, Fitzgerald O'ConnorE, DrakePJH, et al. Development and validation of the Burnt Hand Outcome Tool (BHOT): a patient-led questionnaire for adults with hand burns[J]. Burns, 2018, 44(8):2087-2098.DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2018.07.014.
    [16]
    JonesPS, LeeJW, PhillipsLR, et al. An adaptation of Brislin's translation model for cross-cultural research[J]. Nurs Res,2001,50(5):300-304. DOI: 10.1097/00006199-200109000-00008.
    [17]
    吴明隆.问卷统计分析实务——SPSS操作与应用[M].重庆:重庆大学出版社,2010:207.
    [18]
    林妙然,姜小鹰,胡荣.急性白血病患者报告临床结局量表的编制及信效度检验[J].中华护理杂志, 2019,54(3):350-355. DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2019.03.005.
    [19]
    沈璐,李惠萍,翁慧,等.“以人为本”围术期护理量表的汉化及信效度检验[J].护理研究, 2021,35(11):1904-1908. DOI: 10.12102/j.issn.1009-6493.2021.11.005.
    [20]
    张文芳,郝艳华,田甜.心力衰竭患者口渴困扰量表的汉化及信效度研究[J].中华护理杂志, 2019,54(6):957-960. DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2019.06.032.
    [21]
    李莹,刘婷,苗秀欣,等.痛风影响量表的汉化与信度效度检验[J].中国护理管理,2019,19(10):1472-1477. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1756.2019.10.009.
    [22]
    苏中华,李四劝,成义仁.量表评估的内部一致性与克朗巴赫α系数的应用评价[J].临床心身疾病杂志,2009,15(1):85-86. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-187X.2009.01.047.0085-02.
    [23]
    陈静,谢红,张贤,等.医护合作量表的汉化及信效度检验[J].中华护理杂志, 2014, 49(2): 236-240. DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2014.02.028.
    [24]
    张鸿儒,刘宇,余一彤,等.疾病多维度反刍思维量表的汉化及信效度评价[J].护理研究,2020,34(18): 3214-3219. DOI: 10.12102/j.issn.1009-6493.2020.18.006.
    [25]
    邵静, 叶志弘, 汤磊雯.护理工作环境量表的研制及信效度研究[J].中华护理杂志,2016,51(2):142-147. DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2016.02.002.
    [26]
    潘月帅,魏丽丽,宋蕾,等.医院磁性要素量表的汉化及信效度检验[J].中华护理杂志,2019,54(1):145-150. DOI: 10.3761/j.issn.0254-1769.2019.01.031.
    [27]
    田孟真,周萍,陈鹏,等.中文版输尿管支架相关症状调查问卷的汉化及信效度分析[J].中华现代护理杂志, 2020,26(16):2130-2137. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115682-20191105-04008.
    [28]
    MathersJ, MoiemenN, BamfordA, et al. Ensuring that the outcome domains proposed for use in burns research are relevant to adult burn patients: a systematic review of qualitative research evidence[J/OL].Burns Trauma,2020,8:tkaa030[2021-09-18]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33163540/. DOI: 10.1093/burnst/tkaa030.
    [29]
    FinlayV, BurrowsS, BurmazM, et al. Increased burn healing time is associated with higher Vancouver Scar Scale score[J]. Scars Burn Heal, 2017,3:2059513117696324. DOI: 10.1177/2059513117696324.
    [30]
    SchneiderJC, QuHD, LowryJ, et al. Efficacy of inpatient burn rehabilitation: a prospective pilot study examining range of motion, hand function and balance[J]. Burns,2012,38(2):164-171. DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2011.11.002.
    [31]
    de KlerkS, BuchananH, Jerosch-HeroldC, et al. The validity and clinical utility of the Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand questionnaire for hand injuries in developing country contexts: a systematic review[J]. J Hand Ther,2018,31(1):80-90.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.jht.2017.10.004.
    [32]
    RobillardAS, GaneC, RoyeaC, et al. Cross-cultural translation, adaptation and validation of the Burnt Hand Outcome Tool (BHOT) from English to French Canadian[J]. Burns,2021,47(6): 1429-1441. DOI: 10.1016/j.burns.2020.12.019.
    • Relative Articles
    • Supplements(0)
    • Cited By
  • 加载中

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Figures(1)  / Tables(3)

    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML

    Article Metrics

    Article views (152) PDF downloads(18) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    Copyright © Chinese Journal of Burns京ICP备07035254号-14

    E-mail：shaoshangzazhi@163.com

    Website：https://zhsszz.xml-journal.net/

    Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co. Ltd    

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return