Abstract
PurposeTo develop a translated Dutch version of the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT) and test its psychometric properties in a Dutch population with foot and ankle complaints.MethodsThe CAIT was translated into the Dutch language using a forward–backward translation design. Of the 130 subsequent patients visiting the outpatient clinic for foot and ankle complaints who were asked to fill out a questionnaire containing the CAIT, the Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS), and the numeric rating scale (NRS) pain, 98 completed the questionnaire. After a 1-week period, patients were asked to fill out a second questionnaire online containing the CAIT and NRS pain. This second questionnaire was completed by 70 patients. With these data, the construct validity, test–retest reliability, internal consistency, measurement error, and ceiling and floor effects were assessed. Additionally, a cut-off value to discriminate between stable and unstable ankles, in patients with ankle complaints, was calculated.ResultsConstruct validity showed moderate correlations between the CAIT and FAOS subscales (Spearman’s correlation coefficient (SCC) = 0.36–0.43), and the NRS pain (SCC = −0.55). The cut-off value was found at 11.5 points of the total CAIT score (range 0–30). Test–retest reliability showed to be excellent with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.94. Internal consistency was high (Cronbach’s α = 0.86). No ceiling or floor effects were detected.ConclusionBased on the results, the Dutch version of the CAIT is a valid and reliable questionnaire to assess ankle instability in the Dutch population and is able to differentiate between a functionally unstable and stable ankle. The tool is the first suitable tool to objectify the severity of ankle instability specific complaints and assess change in the Dutch population.Level of evidence II.
Highlights
Self-reported outcome instruments or patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are gaining popularity
To be able to use the Cumberland Ankle Instability Tool (CAIT) to assess the severity of ankle instability and assess complaints over time, the purpose of this study is a cross-cultural translation and an adaptation of the CAIT into the Dutch language and to validate the CAIT in the Dutch population
Test–retest reliability Test–retest reliability was assessed on the subgroup which filled out the CAIT twice with a 1-week interval and reported no difference in complaints
Summary
Self-reported outcome instruments or patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are gaining popularity. This is mainly due to the importance of monitoring the subjective effectiveness of received treatments, required in the current healthcare system to assess treatment quality [16, 28]. The outcome of objective tests does not necessarily correspond with subjective feelings of patients [26], whereas PROMs provide feedback on patients’ view of their complaints. They combine efficiency with reliability and low costs [6]. Up to 30 % of people who suffer from an initial ankle
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
