Recommandations pour la prise en charge de la forme systémique l'arthrite juvénile idiopathique (maladie de Still) [Guidelines for diagnosis and treatment in systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis.]

A guideline group of pediatric rheumatologist experts elaborated guidelines related to the management of idiopathic juvenile arthritis in association with the Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS). A systematic search of the literature published between 1998 and August 2008 and indexed in Pubmed was undertaken. Here, we present the guidelines for diagnosis and treatment in systemic-onset juvenile idiopathic arthritis.

Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, internal consistency and validation of the Spinal Function Sort (SFS) for French- and German-speaking patients with back complaints.

Introduction Functional subjective evaluation through questionnaire is fundamental, but not often realized in patients with back complaints, lacking validated tools. The Spinal Function Sort (SFS) was only validated in English. We aimed to translate, adapt and validate the French (SFS-F) and German (SFS-G) versions of the SFS. Methods Three hundred and forty-four patients, experiencing various back complaints, were recruited in a French (n = 87) and a German-speaking (n = 257) center. Construct validity was estimated via correlations with SF-36 physical and mental scales, pain intensity and hospital anxiety and depression scales (HADS). Scale homogeneities were assessed by Cronbach's α. Test-retest reliability was assessed on 65 additional patients using intraclass correlation (IC). Results For the French and German translations, respectively, α were 0.98 and 0.98; IC 0.98 (95% CI: [0.97; 1.00]) and 0.94 (0.90; 0.98). Correlations with physical functioning were 0.63 (0.48; 0.74) and 0.67 (0.59; 0.73); with physical summary 0.60 (0.44; 0.72) and 0.52 (0.43; 0.61); with pain -0.33 (-0.51; -0.13) and -0.51 (-0.60; -0.42); with mental health -0.08 (-0.29; 0.14) and 0.25 (0.13; 0.36); with mental summary 0.01 (-0.21; 0.23) and 0.28 (0.16; 0.39); with depression -0.26 (-0.45; -0.05) and -0.42 (-0.52; -0.32); with anxiety -0.17 (-0.37; -0.04) and -0.45 (-0.54; -0.35). Conclusions Reliability was excellent for both languages. Convergent validity was good with SF-36 physical scales, moderate with VAS pain. Divergent validity was low with SF-36 mental scales in both translated versions and with HADS for the SFS-F (moderate in SFS-G). Both versions seem to be valid and reliable for evaluating perceived functional capacity in patients with back complaints.

Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Spinal Function Sort (SFS) for French- and German-Speaking Patients with Back Complaints

Aim: Functional subjective evaluation through questionnaire is fundamental, but not often realized in patients with back complaints, notably because of lack of validated tools, in accordance with recognized psychometric criteria. The Spinal Function Sort (SFS), developed according to actual standards, was only validated in English. The aim of this study is to translate, adapt and validate the French and German version of the SFS.Method and material: The translation and cross-cultural adaptation were performed following the methodology proposed by the American Association of Orthopedist Surgeon. A total of 344 patients, presenting varied back complaints (especially degenerative and traumatic), took part in this study in a tertiary French- (n=87; mean age 44y; 17 women) and German-speaking (n=257; mean age 41y; 53 women) center. Test-retest reliability was quantified using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and construct validity was assessed by estimating the Pearson's correlation with the SF-36 physical and mental scales, the Visual Analogue Scale for Pain Intensity (VAS), and subscales of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).Results: Respectively for the French and German version, ICC were 0.98 and 0.94. Correlations 0.63 and 0.67 with the SF-36 Physical Functioning subscale; 0.60 and 0.52 with the SF-36 Physical Summary Scale ; -0.33 and -0.51 with the VAS ; -0.08 and 0.25 with the SF-36 Mental Health scale; 0.01 and 0.28 with the SF-36 Mental Summary Scale; -0.26 and -0.42 with the HADS depression; -0.17 and -0.45 with the HADS anxiety.Discussion: For both the French and German version of the SFS, the reliability was excellent. Convergent construct validity with SF-36 physical scales is good, moderated with the VAS. We find out a low correlation with SF-36 mental scales (divergent construct validity). We find out a low correlation with HADS subscales in the French version, and a moderate one in the German version. Selection bias, chronicity of the complaints, as well as cultural differences could explain these results. In conclusion, both the French and German version of the SFS are valid and reliable for evaluation of perceived functional capacity for patients with back complaints.