An important tool in lymphedema management: validation of Turkish version of the lymphedema breast cancer questionnaire

Doğan H., Abakay H., Güç A., Karaca H.

Disability and Rehabilitation, vol.44, no.21, pp.6424-6431, 2022 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 44 Issue: 21
  • Publication Date: 2022
  • Doi Number: 10.1080/09638288.2021.1963852
  • Journal Name: Disability and Rehabilitation
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus, Academic Search Premier, ASSIA, AgeLine, CINAHL, Educational research abstracts (ERA), EMBASE, Linguistics & Language Behavior Abstracts, MEDLINE, Psycinfo, Public Affairs Index, SportDiscus, Violence & Abuse Abstracts
  • Page Numbers: pp.6424-6431
  • Keywords: diagnosis, Lymphedema, Lymphedema Breast Cancer Questionnaire, symptoms, validity
  • Kayseri University Affiliated: No


Purpose: This study aimed to perform the psychometric evaluation of the Turkish version of the Lymphedema and Breast Cancer Questionnaire (LBCQ). Methods: Patients with BCRL (n = 50) received a Turkish version of the following measurement tools: Lymphedema Functioning, Disability, and Health Questionnaire (Lymph-ICF), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (Quick DASH), LBCQ and Upper Extremity Functional Index (UEFI-20). Patients without BCRL (n = 50) completed only the Turkish LBCQ. Psychometric properties were analyzed with internal consistency, test–retest reliability, ROC analysis, criterion, and discriminant validity. Results: The internal consistency of the Turkish LBCQ was strong (Cronbach's α coefficient >0.60). Test–retest reliability was also very strong (intraclass correlation coefficients from 0.79 to 1; p < 0.001). Criterion validity was supported by a moderate correlation of LBCQ with volumetric measurement, skinfold thickness, and questionnaires (Lymph-ICF, UEFI, and Quick DASH) (p < 0.05) via the ROC analysis, the cut-off point was found as “6” in distinguishing individuals with lymphedema and those without. There were significant differences in LBCQ total and subscale scores between participants with and without BCRL (p < 0.05). Conclusions: This study clinically confirmed the validity, reliability, and applicability of the Turkish LBCQ in the Turkish population. LBCQ will enable the early detection of lymphedema and will save the country financially with early diagnosis.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATION The LBCQ was successfully translated, adapted, and validated into the Turkish language. Turkish version of the LBCQ was found to be reliable and valid to evaluate the signs and symptoms of lymphedema in Turkish women with breast cancer. By using LBCQ, rehabilitation professionals can detect lymphedema at an early stage, reduce the cost of lymphedema treatment and prevent the development of advanced lymphedema in their clinics.