eCross-cultural adaptation of the spine oncology-specific SOSGOQ2.0 questionnaire to German language and the assessment of its validity and reliability in the clinical setting

• Published in: BMC cancer 2021-09, Vol.21 (1), p.1-1044, Article 1044
• Main Authors: Datzmann, T., Kisel, W., Kramer, J., Dreimann, M., Müller-Broich, J. D., Netzer, C., Schaser, K. D., Schmitt, J., Disch, A. C., Sauer, D., Heyde, C., Schmidt, R., Kreinest, M., Arand, M., Liljenqvist, U.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adaptation; Agreements; Bone cancer; Cancer; Consent; German language; Health-related quality of life; Language; Measurement comparison; Mental health; Metastasis; Oncology; Pain; Patients; Quality of life; Questionnaires; Spinal cancer; Spinal malignancies; Tumors; Validation studies; Validity
• ISSN: 1471-2407; 1471-2407
• DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-08578-x

Background The recently developed Spine Oncology Study Group Outcomes Questionnaire (SOSGOQ2.0) was proven a valid and reliable instrument measuring health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for patients with spinal malignancies. A German version was not available. Objective A cross-cultural adaptation of the SOSGOQ2.0 to the German language and its multicenter evaluation. Methods In a multistep process, a cross-cultural adaptation of the SOSGOQ2.0 was conducted. Subsequently, a multicenter, prospective observational cohort study was initiated to assess the reliability and validity of the German adaptation. To assess external construct validity of the cross-cultural adapted questionnaire, a comparison to the established questionnaire QLQ-C30 from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer was conducted. Mean-difference plots were used to measure the agreement between the questionnaires in total score and by domain (deviation from mean up to 10% allowed). Further reliability and validity tests were carried out. Change to baseline was analysed 3–16 weeks later after different interventions occurred. Clinically relevant thresholds in comparison to the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire were evaluated by ROC curve analysis. Results We could enroll 113 patients from four different university hospitals (58 females, 55 males). Mean age was 64.11 years (sd 11.9). 80 patients had an ECOG performance status of 2 or higher at baseline. External construct validity in comparison to the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire in total score and by domain was confirmed (range of deviation 4.4 to 9.0%). Good responsiveness for the domains Physical Functioning (P