Semantic and psychometric validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version (PASE-P) of the Psoriatic Arthritis Screening and Evaluation questionnaire

Carregando...
Imagem de Miniatura
Citações na Scopus
6
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2018
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
Autores
COSTA, Carolina Zorzanelli
CARNEIRO, Sueli
RODRIGUES, Jose Joaquim
MARTINS, Gladys
CARNEIRO, Jamile
GRYNSZPAN, Rachel
SAMPAIO, Ana Luisa
Citação
PLOS ONE, v.13, n.10, article ID e0205486, 10p, 2018
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
PASE (Psoriatic Arthritis Screening and Evaluation) was developed in the English language to screen for inflammatory arthritis among patients with psoriasis. It is 15 item self administered questionnaire with a score from 15 to 75. A higher score indicates a greater risk for inflammatory joint disease. The purpose of this study was to translate, adapt and validate this questionnaire into Brazilian Portuguese (PASE-P). METHODS: 465 patients diagnosed with psoriasis (158 with psoriatic arthritis confirmed by a rheumatologist according to the CASPAR criteria and 307 without) were evaluated in dermatology clinics. We performed the analysis of semantic equivalence in eight steps. For psychometric equivalence, we evaluated the data quality, reliability, construct validity, well-known groups and discriminant characteristics of the items, as well as a ROC curve to determine optimal PASE-P cutoff points in case identification and their sensitivity / specificity. The final version presented excellent reproducibility (CCI = 0.97) and reliability (Cronbach's alpha> 0.9). A cut-off point of 25 distinguished between patients with and without psoriatic arthritis, with sensitivity of 69.5 and specificity of 86.8. PASE-P proved to be culturally valid and reliable to screen for psoriatic arthritis in Brazilian patients with psoriasis.
Palavras-chave
Referências
  1. Beaton DE, 2000, SPINE, V25, P3186, DOI 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014
  2. BENTLER PM, 1980, PSYCHOL BULL, V88, P588, DOI 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
  3. Coates LC, 2013, BRIT J DERMATOL, V168, P802, DOI 10.1111/bjd.12190
  4. Dominguez PL, 2009, ARCH DERMATOL RES, V301, P573, DOI 10.1007/s00403-009-0981-3
  5. Eremenco SL, 2005, EVAL HEALTH PROF, V28, P212, DOI 10.1177/0163278705275342
  6. Garrott LGF, 2013, RHEUMATOLOGY, V52, P510, DOI 10.1093/rheumatology/kes306
  7. Fleiss J., 1986, DESIGN ANAL CLIN EXP
  8. Garg A, 2010, J AM ACAD DERMATOL, V63, P733, DOI 10.1016/j.jaad.2010.02.061
  9. Gladman DD, 2009, ANN RHEUM DIS, V68, P497, DOI 10.1136/ard.2008.089441
  10. Goldenstein-Schainberg C, 2012, REV BRAS REUMATOL, V52, P92, DOI 10.1590/S0482-50042012000100010
  11. Hu LT, 1999, STRUCT EQU MODELING, V6, P1, DOI 10.1080/10705519909540118
  12. Husni ME, 2007, J AM ACAD DERMATOL, V57, P581, DOI 10.1016/j.jaad.2007.04.001
  13. Husted JA, 2007, ARTHRITIS RHEUM, V56, P840, DOI 10.1002/art.22443
  14. Ibrahim GH, 2009, CLIN EXP RHEUMATOL, V27, P469
  15. MCHORNEY CA, 1994, MED CARE, V32, P40, DOI 10.1097/00005650-199401000-00004
  16. McHugh NJ, 2003, RHEUMATOLOGY, V42, P778, DOI 10.1093/rheumatology/keg217
  17. Qureshi AA, 2008, J RHEUMATOL, V35, P1423
  18. Ranza R, 2015, J RHEUMATOL, V42, P829, DOI 10.3899/jrheum.140474
  19. Taylor W, 2006, ARTHRITIS RHEUM, V54, P2665, DOI 10.1002/art.21972
  20. Yuan KH, 2005, MULTIVAR BEHAV RES, V40, P115, DOI 10.1207/s15327906mbr4001_5