The Arabic LupusPRO: A Cross-Cultural Validation of a Disease-Specific Patient-Reported Outcome Tool for Quality of Life in Lupus Patients

Abstract

Objective

To translate and cross-culturally adapt the Arabic version of LupusPRO v.1.8 and to test its reliability and validity.

Methods

LupusPRO was translated into the Arabic language following a standard procedure with forward-backward translation and was tested in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) before use. The Arabic version was administered to 107 Egyptian SLE patients, along with a validated Arabic version of RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0 (SF-36). The internal consistency and test-retest reliability were determined. Validity was assessed by correlating LupusPRO scores with SF-36, Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment–Systemic Lupus Erythematosus Disease Activity Index (SELENA-SLEDAI) and Systemic Lupus International Collaborating Clinics/American College of Rheumatology Damage Index (SDI). The conceptual framework of the Arabic LupusPRO was evaluated using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

Results

Among the 107 SLE patients, 95% were women with a median (range) age of 32 (18-55) years, median (range) SELENA-SLEDAI of 6 (0-23) and median (range) SDI of 0 (0-6). The Cronbach's alpha for the Arabic LupusPRO ranged from 0.71 to 0.98, except for the social support domain (0.65). Test-retest reliability ranged from 0.95 to 0.99. Convergent validity with corresponding domains of SF 36 was satisfactory. For criterion validity, there was a weak but significant correlation between several LupusPRO domains with SELENA-SLEDAI. CFA showed a good model fit.

Conclusion

The Arabic version of LupusPRO v1.8 is a reliable and valid tool for measuring quality of life among Arabic speaking SLE patients.

Keywords

Systemic lupus erythematosus quality of life patient-reported outcome Arabic LupusPRO

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Baker

Pope

JJR.

Employment and work disability in systemic lupus erythematosus: a systematic review. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2009; 48: 281–284.

D'Cruz

Khamashta

Hughes

GR.

Systemic lupus erythematosus. Lancet 2007; 369: 587–596.

Mcelhone

Abbott

Teh

L-S.

A review of health-related quality of life in systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus 2006; 15: 633–643.

Strand

Gladman

Isenberg

Petri

Smolen

Tugwell

PJL.

Endpoints: consensus recommendations from OMERACT IV. Lupus 2000; 9: 322–327.

Strand

Gladman

Isenberg

Petri

Smolen

Tugwell

Outcome measures to be used in clinical trials in systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 1999; 26: 490–497.

Carr

Higginson

IJ.

Are quality of life measures patient centered?

BMJ 2001; 322: 1357–1360.

Toloza

Jolly

Alarcón

GS.

Quality-of-life measurements in multiethnic patients with systemic lupus erythematosus: cross-cultural issues. Curr Rheumatol Rep 2010; 12: 237–249.

Jolly

Pickard

Block

Kumar

RB.

Disease-specific patient reported outcome tools for systemic lupus erythematosus. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2012; 42: 56–65.

Navarra

Tanangunan

RMDV

Mikolaitis-Preuss

Kosinski

Block

Jolly

Cross-cultural validation of a disease-specific patient-reported outcome measure for lupus in Philippines. Lupus 2013; 22: 262–267.

10.

Jolly

Toloza

Block

, et al. Spanish LupusPRO: cross cultural validation study for lupus. Lupus 2013; 22: 431–436.

11.

Kaya

Goker

Cura

, et al. Turkish LupusPRO: cross cultural validation study for lupus. Clin Rheumatol 2014; 33: 1079–1084.

12.

Mok

Kosinski

Chan

Jolly

Validation of the LupusPRO in Chinese patients from Hong Kong with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2015; 67: 297–304.

13.

Bourré-Tessier

Clarke

Kosinski

and Mikolaitis-Preuss

The French-Canadian validation of a disease-specific, patient-reported outcome measure for lupus. Lupus 2014; 23: 1452–1459.

14.

Devilliers

Jolly

Samson

, et al. Validation of the French version of lupus patient reported outcome (LupusPRO), a disease-specific patient reported outcome for lupus patients. [abstract]. Arthritis Rheumatol 2016; 68 (suppl 10).

15.

Inoue

Shiozawa

Yoshihara

, et al. The Japanese LupusPRO: a cross-cultural validation of an outcome measure for lupus. Lupus 2017; 26: 849–856.

16.

Jolly

Mazzoni

Cicognani

Measurement properties of web based LupusPRO, a disease targeted outcome tool among Italian patients with lupus. Value Health 2015; 18: A302.

17.

Beaton

Bombardier

Guillemin

Ferraz

Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaption of self-report measures. Spine 2001; 25: 3186–3191.

18.

Azizoddin

Weinberg

Gandhi

Arora

Validation of the LupusPRO version 1.8: an update to a disease-specific patient-reported outcome tool for systemic lupus erythematosus. Lupus 2018; 27: 728–737.

19.

Petri

Orbai

Alarcón

, et al. Derivation and validation of the systemic lupus international collaborating clinics classification criteria for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 2012; 64: 2677–2686. doi:10.1002/art.34473

20.

Petri

Kim

Kalunian

, et al.; OC-SELENA Trial. Combined oral contraceptives in women with systemic lupus erythematosus. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 2550–2558.

21.

Gladman

Ginzler

Goldsmith

, et al. The development and initial validation of the systemic lupus international collaborating clinics/American college of rheumatology damage index for systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum 1996; 39: 363–369.

22.

Mokkink

Terwee CB Patrick

Alonso

International consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health related patient-reported outcomes: results of the COSMIN study. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63: 737–745.

23.

Mokkink

Terwee

Knol

, et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol 2010; 10: 22.

24.

Coons

Alabdulmohsin

Draugalis

Hays

RD.

Reliability of an Arabic version of the RAND-36 health survey and its equivalence to the US-English version. Med Care 1998; 36: 428–432.

25.

Hays

Anderson

Revicki

Psychometric considerations in evaluating health-related quality of life measures. Qual Life Res 1993; 2: 441–449.

26.

Chan

YH.

Biostatistics 104: correlational analysis. Singap Med J 2003; 44: 614–619.

27.

Jackson

Gillaspy

Purc-Stephenson

Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations. Psychol Methods 2009; 14: 6–23.

28.

Jolly

Cornejo

Mikolaitis

Block

JA.

LupusPRO and responsiveness to changes in health status and disease activity over time. Arthritis Rheum 2011; 63: S898.

29.

Jolly

Kosinski

Toloza

, et al. Equivalence of various language versions of lupus specific patient reported outcomes measure (LupusPRO). Arthritis Rheum 2012; 64: S607.

30.

Marx

Menezes

Horovitz

Jones

Warren

RF.

A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidem 2003; 56: 730–735.

31.

Freire

EAM

Maia

Nepomuceno

JCA

Ciconelli

RM.

Damage index assessment and quality of life in systemic lupus erythematosus patients (with long-term disease) in northeastern Brazil. Clin Rheumatol 2007; 26: 423–428.

32.

Wang

Mayo

Fortin

The relationship between health related quality of life and disease activity and damage in systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 2001; 28: 525–532.

33.

Jolly

Sequeira

Block

, et al. Sex differences in quality of life in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) 2019; 71: 1647–1652.