Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Ocular Surface Disease Index (OSDI) questionnaire was first introduced and developed in 1997 by the Outcomes Research Group, and was adopted by Allergan, Inc. (Irvine, Goleta, CA). While several tools are available for evaluating dry eye syndrome (DES), the OSDI questionnaire is known to have high reliability and validity. Additionally, although more complex questionnaires are available, the goal of the OSDI is to ensure a rapid diagnosis of ocular surface disease. The OSDI consists of a 12-item questionnaire designed to assess the visual disability caused by DES. The OSDI score can range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating greater disability. This language-inclusive mini-review aimed to provide a comprehensive overview of previous studies that translated the OSDI into various languages and validated the translated versions. METHODS: OSDI validation studies were identified through a PubMed / MEDLINE and Google Scholar search spanning the 27 years since the establishment of the OSDI, using the broad term "Ocular Surface Disease Index-12 questions" and keywords that is "ocular surface disease index-12," "translation and validation," "transcultural validation," "development," "cross-cultural adaptation," and "reliability and validity." We included original studies that validated the translated version of the OSDI in various languages, presenting the key findings with a focus on reliability and repeatability outcomes. RESULTS: Thirteen full-text articles were thoroughly reviewed, including those identified through targeted keyword searches and the reference lists of these studies. The papers examined the translation of the English version of the OSDI-12 questionnaire into nine languages: Italian, Arabic, Chinese, Chilean Spanish, Japanese, Filipino, Farsi, Bahasa Melayu, and Brazilian Portuguese. Key details regarding the development, translation, and validation phases were summarized. Most of the included studies adhered to standard guidelines throughout the translation process to create a final version of the OSDI questionnaire. This was followed by clinical validation of the final translated version. The majority of the translated versions were assessed for internal consistency, reliability, test-retest repeatability, and discriminant validity. CONCLUSIONS: The original English version of the OSDI was translated into validated versions to achieve a final version in nine different languages. The majority of the translated versions demonstrated high reproducibility and reliability. The different language versions of the questionnaire removed language barriers in informing the eye-care community, evaluating DES, and assisting physicians in advising and managing their patients more suitably. Therefore, the validated versions of OSDI can be used as tools for clinical practice and DES research. Validating the OSDI questionnaire in various languages is essential to eliminate the language barrier in the assessment of dry eye disease.