A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Cross-cultural adaptation, reproducibility and validation of the Italian version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS). | LitMetric

Cross-cultural adaptation, reproducibility and validation of the Italian version of the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS).

Int Wound J

Laboratory of Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders Assessment, Division of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri SpA-SB, Scientific Institute of Veruno, IRCCS, Novara, Italy.

Published: December 2017

The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) is one of the most robust instruments to assess scar quality, but there is no Italian version, and no other competing instruments are available in Italian. The aim of this study was to translate and validate an Italian version of POSAS (POSAS-I). POSASv2.0 was culturally adapted in accordance with international standards. The psychometric assessment included acceptability/feasibility, internal consistency, reproducibility, construct validity and sensitivity to change. Cultural equivalence of POSAS-I with the English version was confirmed. The validation study included 102 subjects with surgical scars. Both subscales demonstrated acceptable internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0·72-0·80). Reproducibility of the OSAS-I (ICCs = 0·93-0·94; SEM = 1·8 points; MDC = 5·1 points) was superior to that of PSAS-I (ICC = 0·65; SEM = 5·7 points; MDC = 15·7 points). OSAS-I showed moderate to good correlations with the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS), Global Rating of Change Scale (GRCS) and PSAS-I. Sensitivity to change was large for PSAS-I (effect size = 1·08; standardised response mean = 0·96) and moderate to large for OSAS-I (ES = 0·69; SRM = 0·92). This study confirmed that POSAS-I can be used to assess patients with surgical scars in the Italian population. OSAS-I is useful for clinical and research purposes, while PSAS-I should be better used to capture patients' own opinions and symptoms in clinical settings.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7950069PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/iwj.12795DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

italian version
12
patient observer
8
observer scar
8
scar assessment
8
assessment scale
8
scale posas
8
internal consistency
8
sensitivity change
8
surgical scars
8
points mdc
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!