Dataset Information

Translation and validation of the German version of the Bournemouth questionnaire for low back pain.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Finding the best outcome measures for research and quality assurance purposes in terms of validity, sensitivity to change, length and ease of completion is crucial. The Bournemouth questionnaire for neck pain patients was recently translated and validated into German and found to be more sensitive to change than other commonly used questionnaires. However, the low back pain version is not yet available in German. Therefore the purpose of this study was to translate and validate the Bournemouth Questionnaire (BQ) for low back pain (LBP) into German.

Methods

The translation was done in 4 steps, translated and back-translated by two independent people and adapted and approved by an expert committee. Face validity was then done by 30 people who checked the questionnaire for comprehension. Test-retest reliability (reproducibility) was tested using 30 stable back pain patients. Internal consistency was tested using 108 low back patients. External construct validity, external longitudinal validity and responsiveness was tested against the German versions of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the SF-36 questionnaire using 108 patients from 5 different chiropractic clinics.

Results

The BQ showed high test-retest reliability (ICC > 0.91) for all items and strong internal consistency (Cronbachs alpha = 0.86 at baseline and 0.94 at 4 weeks).

Conclusion

The BQ for LBP was successfully translated and adapted into German. It was successfully tested for validity, consistency, and responsiveness against the German versions of the ODI and the SF-36. It is shorter, covers more domains than the ODI and is more sensitive to change than the other questionnaires.

SUBMITTER: Blum-Fowler C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3849369 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Translation and validation of the German version of the Bournemouth questionnaire for low back pain.

Blum-Fowler Celina C Peterson Cynthia C McChurch Johanna Forrer JF Le Clech Yann Y Humphreys B Kim BK

Chiropractic & manual therapies 20130926 1

<h4>Background</h4>Finding the best outcome measures for research and quality assurance purposes in terms of validity, sensitivity to change, length and ease of completion is crucial. The Bournemouth questionnaire for neck pain patients was recently translated and validated into German and found to be more sensitive to change than other commonly used questionnaires. However, the low back pain version is not yet available in German. Therefore the purpose of this study was to translate and validat ...[more]

PMID: 24295339

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundClinical outcome measures are important tools to monitor patient improvement during treatment as well as to document changes for research purposes. The short-form Bournemouth questionnaire for neck pain patients (BQN) was developed from the biopsychosocial model and measures pain, disability, cognitive and affective domains. It has been shown to be a valid and reliable outcome measure in English, French and Dutch and more sensitive to change compared to other questionnaires. The purpose of this study was to translate and validate a German version of the Bournemouth questionnaire for neck pain patients.MethodsGerman translation and back translation into English of the BQN was done independently by four persons and overseen by an expert committee. Face validity of the German BQN was tested on 30 neck pain patients in a single chiropractic practice. Test-retest reliability was evaluated on 31 medical students and chiropractors before and after a lecture. The German BQN was then assessed on 102 first time neck pain patients at two chiropractic practices for internal consistency, external construct validity, external longitudinal construct validity and sensitivity to change compared to the German versions of the Neck Disability Index (NDI) and the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD).ResultsFace validity testing lead to minor changes to the German BQN. The Intraclass Correlation Coefficient for the test-retest reliability was 0.99. The internal consistency was strong for all 7 items of the BQN with Cronbach ?'s of .79 and .80 for the pre and post-treatment total scores. External construct validity and external longitudinal construct validity using Pearson's correlation coefficient showed statistically significant correlations for all 7 scales of the BQN with the other questionnaires. The German BQN showed greater responsiveness compared to the other questionnaires for all scales.ConclusionsThe German BQN is a valid and reliable outcome measure that has been successfully translated and culturally adapted. It is shorter, easier to use, and more responsive to change than the NDI and NPAD.

Project description:BackgroundBack pain in childhood and adolescence increases the risk for back pain in adulthood, but validated assessment tools are scarce. The aim of this study was to validate the Young Spine Questionnaire (YSQ) in a German version (G-YSQ) in children and adolescents.MethodsChildren and adolescents between 10 and 16 years (N = 240, 166 females, mean age = 13.05 ± 1.70 years), recruited in chiropractic practices and schools, completed the G-YSQ (translated according to scientific guidelines) and the KIDSCREEN-10 (assessing health-related quality of life) at three time points. Test-retest reliability was determined calculating intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC(3,1)] using start and two week-data. Construct validity was investigated testing a priori hypotheses. To assess responsiveness, the patients additionally filled in the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) after three months and the area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operating curves was calculated.ResultsThe ICC(3,1) was 0.88 for pain intensity and pain frequency, indicating good reliability, 0.68 for week prevalence and 0.60 for point prevalence, indicating moderate reliability. Pain intensity, frequency and prevalence differed between patients and controls (p < 0.001) and, except point prevalence, between older (> 12 years) and younger control participants (p < 0.01). Health-related quality of life of participants with severe pain (in one or several spinal regions) was lower (KIDSCREEN-10, total score: F(4,230) = 7.26, p < 0.001; KIDSCREEN-10, self-rated general health: H(4) = 51.94, p < 0.001) than that of participants without pain or with moderate pain in one spinal region. Thus, altogether these findings indicate construct validity of the G-YSQ. The AUC was 0.69 (95 % CI = 0.57-0.82) and 0.67 (95 % CI = 0.54-0.80) for week and point prevalence, respectively, indicating insufficient responsiveness of the G-YSQ.ConclusionsApart from the question on point prevalence, construct validity and sufficient test-retest reliability was shown for the G-YSQ. However, its responsiveness needs to be improved, possibly by asking for pain frequency during the last week instead of (dichotomous) week prevalence.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02955342, registered 07/09/2016, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=&term=NCT02955342&cntry=CH&state=&city=Zurich&dist= .

Project description:BACKGROUND:The Fremantle Back Awareness Questionnaire (FreBAQ) claims to assess disrupted self-perception of the back. The aim of this study was to develop a German version of the FreBAQ (FreBAQ-G) and assess its test-retest reliability, its known-groups validity and its convergent validity with another purported measure of back perception. METHODS:The FreBaQ-G was translated following international guidelines for the transcultural adaptation of questionnaires. Thirty-five patients with non-specific CLBP and 48 healthy participants were recruited. Assessor one administered the FreBAQ-G to each patient with CLBP on two separate days to quantify intra-observer reliability. Assessor two administered the FreBaQ-G to each patient on day 1. The scores were compared to those obtained by assessor one on day 1 to assess inter-observer reliability. Known-groups validity was quantified by comparing the FreBAQ-G score between patients and healthy controls. To assess convergent validity, patient's FreBAQ-G scores were correlated to their two-point discrimination (TPD) scores. RESULTS:Intra- and Inter-observer reliability were both moderate with ICC3.1 = 0.88 (95%CI: 0.77 to 0.94) and 0.89 (95%CI: 0.79 to 0.94), respectively. Intra- and inter-observer limits of agreement (LoA) were 6.2 (95%CI: 5.0-8.1) and 6.0 (4.8-7.8), respectively. The adjusted mean difference between patients and controls was 5.4 (95%CI: 3.0 to 7.8, p<0.01). Patient's FreBAQ-G scores were not associated with TPD thresholds (Pearson's r = -0.05, p = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS:The FreBAQ-G demonstrated a degree of reliability and known-groups validity. Interpretation of patient level data should be performed with caution because the LoA were substantial. It did not demonstrate convergent validity against TPD. Floor effects of some items of the FreBAQ-G may have influenced the validity and reliability results. The clinimetric properties of the FreBAQ-G require further investigation as a simple measure of disrupted self-perception of the back before firm recommendations on its use can be made.

Project description:BackgroundThe number of patients with chronic illness is increasing worldwide. These patients usually receive care from a primary care facility. The Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care (PACIC) is a tool that is increasingly used in several countries to measure how the patients perceive the care they receive. The goal of this validation study is to provide and validate an extended version of the tool, the PACIC+ questionnaire, in Thailand.MethodsIn this observational validation study, patients with type 2 diabetes from the outpatient clinic at a university hospital in Thailand completed the PACIC+ at the clinic. For follow-up, they received the questionnaire per mail after four weeks. The Thai PACIC+ comprises 26 items, which map onto 5 subscales and a summary score related to the Chronic Care Model (CCM) and 5 subscales and a summary score related to the 5A model, a counseling model for behavioral changes. Data-analysis focused on the use of most extreme answering categories (> 15%), internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha), and test-retest reliability. An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was performed for the CCM and the 5A model separately to examine the factor structure.ResultsA total of 151 patients participated. The average age of the sample was 63 ± 9 years (range 29-86 years). Fifty-three percent of the respondents were female. In the Delivery System subscale, 20% of patients reported the highest possible value; in all other subscales, relative frequencies of the most extreme categories did not exceed 15%. Cronbach's alpha per subscale varied from 0.58 to 0.81, while that of the summary scores were 0.89 and 0.91. The mean difference from the test-retest varied from - 0.06 to 0.17 across subscales. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin criterion for sampling adequacy (KMO) was good for both models as well as the Bartlett's test for sphericity p. While the factor loadings in rotated factor solution showed good concordance with the CCM, concordance was not as good for the 5A model, especially for the subscales "Assess" and "Advice".ConclusionA validated Thai version of the PACIC+ is now available to measure how the patients perceive the care they receive.

Project description:BackgroundThe Modified Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (MLBPDQ) is used for evaluating the functional disability in patients with low back pain (LBP). However, the measurement characteristics of the MLBPDQ among Arab patients are unknown. In this study, we aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the MLBPDQ into Arabic and evaluate its psychometric properties.MethodsAn Arabic version of the MLBPDQ was developed through forward translation, translation synthesis, and backward translation. Sixty-eight patients (55 males and 13 females) with a mean age 37.01 ± 7.57 years were recruited to assess its psychometric properties. Reliability was evaluated using internal consistency (Cronbach’s α), test retest reliability (utilizing intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]), standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change at 95% confidence level (MDC95%), and 95% limits of agreement (LOA). The construct validity was investigated by correlating the new translation with four other measures of LBP (using Spearman’s rho). Finally, receiver operating characteristic curve was constructed to compute the sensitivity, using the area under the curve (AUC), and the minimum important change (MIC). An alpha level of 0.05 was set for statistical tests and all the psychometric values were tested against a priori hypotheses.ResultsThe culturally aligned MLBPDQ showed good internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = 0.85). The ICC, SEM, MDC95%, and LOA between baseline and two days later were 0.98, 1.60, 4.43, and -4.23 to 7.70, respectively, while the values between baseline and 14 days later were 0.94, 2.77, 7.67, and -6.59 to 13.53, respectively. The scale also demonstrated moderate to excellent correlation (rho = 0.54–0.86) with the other four questionnaires. The AUC value of the Arabic-MLBPDQ was 0.68, and the MIC was 3 points.ConclusionThe Arabic version of the MLBPDQ demonstrates adequate psychometric properties and can be used to assess disability level in patients with LBP in Arabic-speaking communities.

Dataset Information

Translation and validation of the German version of the Bournemouth questionnaire for low back pain.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Translation and validation of the German version of the Bournemouth questionnaire for low back pain.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets