Cross-cultural adaptation of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) for Hebrew-speaking subjects with and without hand injury

Abstract

Purpose: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) questionnaire is used internationally to assess function and disability. The instrument has been translated into several languages, but no Hebrew version exists. The objective of this study was to evaluate the use of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 questionnaire among Hebrew speakers with and without hand injuries (HI).Methods: The translated questionnaire was conducted among 155 uninjured subjects (UI) and 77 male workers with HI. Internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha. Test–retest reliability was assessed in UI subjects and calculated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICCagreement). Validity was evaluated by correlating the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 to the short-form of health survey (SF-12) in UI subjects and comparing the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 scores and the Quick Disability of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QDASH) Outcome Measure in the HI group.Results: The Cronbach’s alpha of the WHODAS 2.0 for the entire sample was α = 0.83. The ICCagreement for test–retest reliability was 0.88. A positive significant correlation was found between the 12-item WHODAS 2.0 and the QDASH (rs = 0.53, p < .005).Conclusions: The results support the reliability and validity of this Hebrew translation of the 12-item WHODAS 2.0. IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONMeasurement tools that assess activities and participation after HI are an essential part of the rehabilitation process. The 12-item WHODAS 2.0 is a useful tool, since it addresses a broader range of activity and participation domains compared to the DASH and enables better implementation of the ICF model.Since the WHODAS 2.0 does not target a specific disease (as oppose to the DASH), it can be used to compare disabilities caused by different diseases or traumas.The WHODAS 2.0 measures both the function and disability in general populations as well as clinical situations; therefore, the instrument is useful for assessing both health and disability.