The purpose of this study was to translate and culturally adapt the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire to produce an equivalent Korean version. A total of 53 patients completed the Korean version of the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire pre-operatively and 3 months after open carpal tunnel release. All 53 also completed the Korean version of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire pre-operatively and 3 months post-operatively. Reliability was measured by determining the test–retest reliability and internal consistency. Test–retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients and paired t-tests, and internal consistency using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients. Pearson correlation analysis was carried out on the Korean version of the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire scores and the Korean version of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores to assess construct validity. Responsiveness was evaluated using effect sizes and standardized response means. The reliability of the Korean version of the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire was good. The scores in the Korean version of the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand strongly correlated with the scores in the Korean version of the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. Standardized response mean and effect size were both large for the Korean version of the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. The study shows that the Korean version of the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire is a reliable, valid and responsive instrument for measuring outcomes in carpal tunnel syndrome.
AmadioPCSilversteinMDIlstrupDMSchleckCDJensenLM. Outcome assessment for carpal tunnel surgery: the relative responsiveness of generic, arthritis-specific, disease-specific, and physical examination measures. J Hand Surg Am. 1996, 21: 338–46.
2.
AtroshiIJohnssonRSprinchornA. Self-administered outcome instrument in carpal tunnel syndrome. Reliability, validity and responsiveness evaluated in 102 patients. Acta Orthop Scand. 1998, 69: 82–8.
3.
BeatonDEBombardierCGuilleminFFerrazMB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000, 25: 3186–91.
4.
BeatonDEHogg-JohnsonSBombardierC. Evaluating changes in health status: reliability and responsiveness of five generic health status measures in workers with musculoskeletal disorders. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997, 50: 79–93.
5.
BrewerNTHallmanWKFiedlerNKipenHM. Why do people report better health by phone than by mail?Med Care. 2004, 42: 875–83.
6.
BromleyGS. Minimal-incision open carpal tunnel decompression. J Hand Surg Am. 1994, 19: 119–20.
7.
CelloccoPRossiCBizzarriFPatrizioLCostanzoG. Mini-open blind procedure versus limited open technique for carpal tunnel release: a 30-month follow-up study. J Hand Surg Am. 2005, 30: 493–9.
8.
CronbachLJ. A case study of the split-half reliability coefficient. J Educ Psychol. 1946, 37: 473–80.
9.
EekhoutIde BoerRMTwiskJWde VetHCHeymansMW. Missing data: a systematic review of how they are reported and handled. Epidemiology. 2012, 23: 729–32.
10.
FokMWLeungHBLeeWM. Evaluation of a Hong Kong Chinese version of a self-administered questionnaire for assessing symptom severity and functional status of carpal tunnel syndrome: cross-cultural adaptation and reliability. Hong Kong Med J. 2007, 13: 342–7.
11.
GayREAmadioPCJohnsonJC. Comparative responsiveness of the disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand, the carpal tunnel questionnaire, and the SF-36 to clinical change after carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Am. 2003, 28: 250–4.
12.
GreensladeJRMehtaRLBelwardPWarwickDJ. DASH and Boston questionnaire assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome outcome: what is the responsiveness of an outcome questionnaire?J Hand Surg Br. 2004, 29: 159–64.
13.
HaysRDKimSSpritzerKL. Effects of mode and order of administration on generic health-related quality of life scores. Value Health. 2009, 12: 1035–9.
14.
HobbyJLVenkateshRMotkurP. The effect of age and gender upon symptoms and surgical outcomes in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Br. 2005, 30: 599–604.
15.
HudakPLAmadioPCBombardierC. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med. 1996, 29: 602–8.
16.
ImaedaTUchiyamaSTohS. Validation of the Japanese Society for Surgery of the Hand version of the Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Instrument. J Orthop Sci. 2007, 12: 14–21.
17.
IwatsukiKNishikawaKChakiMSatoAMoritaAHirataH. Comparative responsiveness of the Hand 20 and the DASH-JSSH questionnaires to clinical changes after carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Eur. 2014, 39: 145–51.
18.
KadzielskiJMalhotraLRZurakowskiDLeeSGJupiterJBRingD. Evaluation of preoperative expectations and patient satisfaction after carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Am. 2008, 33: 1783–8.
19.
KimJKJeonSH. Minimal clinically important differences in the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire after carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Eur. 2012, 38: 75–9.
20.
KimJKKangJS. Evaluation of the Korean version of the patient-rated wrist evaluation. J Hand Ther. 2013, 26: 238–44.
21.
KimJKKimYK. Predictors of scar pain after open carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Am. 2012, 36: 1042–6.
22.
LevineDWSimmonsBPKorisMJ. A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993, 75: 1585–92.
23.
MacDermidJCTottenhamV. Responsiveness of the disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) and patient-rated wrist/hand evaluation (PRWHE) in evaluating change after hand therapy. J Hand Ther. 2004, 17: 18–23.
24.
MacDermidJCTurgeonTRichardsRSBeadleMRothJH. Patient rating of wrist pain and disability: a reliable and valid measurement tool. J Orthop Trauma. 1998, 12: 577–86.
25.
MokkinkLBTerweeCBPatrickDL. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010, 63: 737–45.
26.
NavarroCMPonzerSTornkvistHAhrengartLBergstromG. Measuring outcome after wrist injury: Translation and validation of the Swedish version of the patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE-Swe). BMC Muscul Dis. 2011, 12.
27.
OzyurekogluTMcCabeSJGoldsmithLJLaJoieAS. The minimal clinically important difference of the Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Symptom Severity Scale. J Hand Surg Am. 2006, 31: 733–8; discussion 9–40.
28.
RohYHYangBKNohJHBaekGHSongCHGongHS. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Korean version of the Michigan Hand Questionnaire. J Hand Surg Am. 2011, 36: 1497–503.
29.
RosalesRSDelgadoEBDiez de la Lastra-BoschI. Evaluation of the Spanish version of the DASH and carpal tunnel syndrome health-related quality-of-life instruments: cross-cultural adaptation process and reliability. J Hand Surg Am. 2002, 27: 334–43.
30.
RosalesRSDiez de la LastraIMcCabeSOrtega MartinezJIHidalgoYM. The relative responsiveness and construct validity of the Spanish version of the DASH instrument for outcomes assessment in open carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Eur. 2009, 34: 72–5.
31.
SerraJMBenitoJRMonnerJ. Carpal tunnel release with short incision. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997, 99: 129–35.
32.
StratfordPWBinkleyJMRiddleDL. Health status measures: strategies and analytic methods for assessing change scores. Phys Ther. 1996, 76: 1109–23.
33.
StuckiGLiangMHFosselAHKatzJN. Relative responsiveness of condition-specific and generic health status measures in degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995, 48: 1369–78.
34.
ZylukAWalaszekI. The effect of the involvement of the dominant or non-dominant hand on grip/pinch strengths and the Levine score in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome. J Hand Surg Eur. 2011, 37: 427–31.
