Translation, validation, and cross-cultural adaption of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) into German

  • M. Sgroi
  • M. Däxle
  • S. Kocak
  • H. Reichel
  • T. Kappe



The Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) was developed in order to investigate the health-related quality of life of patients with meniscal pathologies. The aim of the present study was to translate and validate the WOMET into German.


A standardized forward backward translation of the WOMET into German was first performed. One hundred ninety-two patients with isolated meniscal tears completed the German version of the WOMET as well as the Western Ontario McMasters University Arthritis Index, and the Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score. Furthermore, reliability, construct validity, feasibility, internal consistency, ceiling, and floor effects were then calculated.


Excellent feasibility (85.4% fully complete questionnaire), internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.92), and test–retest reliability (ICC, r = 0.90) were found. The standard error of measurement and the minimal detectable change were ±4.6 and 12.7 points, respectively. All predefined hypothesises were confirmed. No floor or ceiling effects were found.


The presented German version of the WOMET is a valid and reliable tool for investigating the health-related quality of life of German-speaking patients with meniscal pathologies.

Level of evidence

Cross-sectional study, Level II.


WOMET Meniscal tear Quality of life Translation Validation 



Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool


Western Ontario McMasters University Arthritis Index


Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score


Intraclass correlation coefficient


Standard error of measurement


Minimal detectable change



The authors would like to thank Mrs. Baerbel Kappe for her assistance during the conduction of the present study.

Authors’ contributions

MS participated in the design of the study and in the translations procedure of the questionnaire, collected the data, performed the statistical analysis, and wrote the manuscript. MD participated in the design of the study and helped during the translations process. SK participated in the statistical analysis. HR participated in the study design and coordination and helped to design the manuscript. TK developed the study design, participated in its design and coordination, planned and contributed to the translations procedure of the questionnaire, and helped to draft the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.


There is no funding source.

Ethical approval

This study was approved by the institutional review board of the University of Ulm (ID-number: 43/14). This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent



  1. 1.
    Beirer M, Fiedler N, Huber S, Schmitt-Sody M, Lorenz S, Biberthaler P, Kirchhoff C (2015) The Munich Knee Questionnaire: development and validation of a new patient-reported outcome measurement tool for knee disorders. Arthroscopy 31:1522–1529CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833–1840PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bullinger M, Anderson R, Cella D, Aaronson N (1993) Developing and evaluating cross-cultural instruments from minimum requirements to optimal models. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil 2:451–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Celik D, Demirel M, Kuş G, Erdil M, Özdinçler AR (2015) Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET). Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 23:816–825CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cronbach L (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16:297–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Englund M, Niu J, Guermazi A, Roemer FW, Hunter DJ, Lynch JA, Lewis CE, Torner J, Nevitt MC, Zhang YQ, Felson DT (2007) Effect of meniscal damage on the development of frequent knee pain, aching, or stiffness. Arthritis Rheum 56:4048–4054CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Englund M, Roemer FW, Hayashi D, Crema MD, Guermazi A (2012) Meniscus pathology, osteoarthritis and the treatment controversy. Nat Rev Rheumatol 8:412–419CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ettema TP, Dröes R-M, de Lange J, Mellenbergh GJ, Ribbe MW (2005) A review of quality of life instruments used in dementia. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil 14:675–686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garratt AM, Brealey S, Gillespie WJ, Trial Team DAMASK (2004) Patient-assessed health instruments for the knee: a structured review. Rheumatol (Oxford Engl) 43:1414–1423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Graham B, Green A, James M, Katz J, Swiontkowski M (2015) Measuring patient satisfaction in orthopaedic surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:80–84CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guillemin F (1995) Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of health status measures. Scand J Rheumatol 24:61–63CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D (1993) Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 46:1417–1432CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haviv B, Bronak S, Kosashvili Y, Thein R (2016) Which patients are less likely to improve during the first year after arthroscopic partial meniscectomy? A multivariate analysis of 201 patients with prospective follow-up. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:1427–1431CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim S, Bosque J, Meehan JP, Jamali A, Marder R (2011) Increase in outpatient knee arthroscopy in the United States: a comparison of National Surveys of Ambulatory Surgery, 1996 and 2006. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:994–1000CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kirkley A, Griffin S, Whelan D (2007) The development and validation of a quality of life-measurement tool for patients with meniscal pathology: the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET). Clin J Sport Med 17:349–356CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kirshner B, Guyatt G (1985) A methodological framework for assessing health indices. J Chronic Dis 38:27–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW (2010) The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res Int J Qual Life Asp Treat Care Rehabil 19:539–549CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Naal FD, Sieverding M, Impellizzeri FM, von Knoch F, Mannion AF, Leunig M (2009) Reliability and validity of the cross-culturally adapted German Oxford hip score. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:952–957CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nunnally J, Bernstein I (1994) Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Roos EM, Roos HP, Lohmander LS, Ekdahl C, Beynnon BD (1998) Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS)-development of a self-administered outcome measure. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 28:88–96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ruiz-Ibán MA, Seijas R, Sallent A, Ares O, Marín-Peña O, Muriel A, Cuéllar R (2015) The international Hip Outcome Tool-33 (iHOT-33): multicenter validation and translation to Spanish. Health Qual Life Outcomes 13:62CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sihvonen R, Järvelä T, Aho H, Järvinen TLN (2012) Validation of the Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool (WOMET) for patients with a degenerative meniscal tear: a meniscal pathology-specific quality-of-life index. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(10):165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Stensrud S, Risberg MA, Roos EM (2014) Knee function and knee muscle strength in middle-aged patients with degenerative meniscal tears eligible for arthroscopic partial meniscectomy. Br J Sports Med 48:784–788CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Stratford PW, Kennedy DM (2014) A comparison study of KOOS-PS and KOOS function and sport scores. Phys Ther 94(11):1614–1621CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tanner SM, Dainty KN, Marx RG, Kirkley A (2007) Knee-specific quality-of-life instruments: which ones measure symptoms and disabilities most important to patients? Am J Sports Med 35:1450–1458CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    van der Wal RJP, Heemskerk BTJ, van Arkel ERA, Mokkink LB, Thomassen BJW (2016) Translation and validation of the Dutch Western Ontario Meniscal Evaluation Tool. J Knee Surg. doi: 10.1055/s-0036-1584576 Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wang D, Jones MH, Khair MM, Miniaci A (2010) Patient-reported outcome measures for the knee. J Knee Surg 23:137–151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yim J-H, Seon J-K, Song E-K, Choi J-I, Kim M-C, Lee K-B, Seo H-Y (2013) A comparative study of meniscectomy and nonoperative treatment for degenerative horizontal tears of the medial meniscus. Am J Sports Med 41:1565–1570CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Zywiel MG, Mahomed A, Gandhi R, Perruccio AV, Mahomed NN (2013) Measuring expectations in orthopaedic surgery: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:3446–3456CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryUniversity of UlmUlmGermany

Personalised recommendations