Dataset Information

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the German Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI-GE).

ABSTRACT:

Background

The Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) is a screening tool designed to detect symptoms related to Central Sensitization (CS) and Central Sensitivity Syndromes (CSS) by measuring the degree of related phenomena. The objective of this study was to create a German, culturally-adapted version of the CSI and to test its psychometric properties.

Methods

A German version of the CSI (CSI-GE) was developed, culturally-adapted, and pretested for comprehensibility. The psychometric properties of the resulting version were validated in a clinical study with chronic pain and pain-free control subjects. To assess retest reliability, the CSI-GE was administered twice to a subgroup of patients. Structural validity was tested using factor analyses. To investigate construct validity a hypotheses testing approach was used, including (1) correlations between the CSI-GE and several other well-established questionnaires as well as (2) an investigation of the CSI-GE discriminative power between different subgroups of participants believed to have different degrees of CS.

Results

The CSI-GE showed excellent reliability, including high test-retest characteristics. Factor analyses confirmed a bi-factor dimensionality as has been determined previously. Analysing construct validity 6 out of 11 hypotheses (55%) were met. CSI-GE scores differentiated between subgroups according to expectations. Correlations between CSI-GE scores and other questionnaires suggested that none of the correlated constructs was identical, but there was overlap with other questionnaires based on symptom load. Several correlations did not fit with our current understanding of CS.

Conclusion

The CSI-GE appears to be a reliable tool for measuring CS/CSS-related symptomatology. Whether this implies that the CSI-GE measures the degree of CS within an individual subject remains unknown. The resulting score should be interpreted cautiously until further clarification of the construct.

SUBMITTER: Klute M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8375049 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCentral sensitization is thought to be an important contributing factor in many chronic pain disorders. The Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI) is a patient-reported measure frequently used to assess symptoms related to central sensitization. The aims of the study were to translate and cross-culturally adapt the CSI into Nepali (CSI-NP) and assess its measurement properties.MethodsThe CSI was translated into Nepali using recommended guidelines. The CSI-NP was then administered on 100 Nepalese adults with sub-acute and chronic musculoskeletal pain with additional demographic and pain-related questions. The CSI-Nepali was administered again about 2 weeks later. Four measurement properties of the CSI-NP were evaluated: (1) internal consistency using Cronbach's alpha, (2) test-retest reliability using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1), (3) measurement errors, and (4) construct validity testing five a priori hypotheses. Confirmation of construct validity was determined if a minimum of 75% of the hypotheses were met.ResultsThe CSI was successfully translated into Nepali. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were both excellent (Cronbach's alpha = 0.91, and ICC = 0.98). The standard error of measurement was 0.31 and the smallest detectable change was 0.86. Four out of five (80%) a priori hypotheses were met, confirming the construct validity: the CSI-NP correlated strongly with the Pain Catastrophizing Scale total scores (r = 0.50); moderately with the total number of pain descriptors (r = 0.35); weakly with the Numerical Rating Scale (r = 0.25); and women had significantly higher CSI scores than men. However, the CSI scores did not correlate significantly with the total duration of pain, as hypothesized (r = 0.10).ConclusionsThe Nepali translation of the CSI demonstrated excellent reliability and construct validity in adults with musculoskeletal pain. It is now available to Nepali health care providers to help assess central sensitization-related signs and symptoms in individuals with musculoskeletal pain in research or clinical practice to advance the understanding of central sensitization in Nepalese samples.

Project description:IntroductionSince the response of spouses has been proven to be an important reinforcement of pain behaviour and disability it has been addressed in research and therapy. Fordyce suggested pain behaviour and well behaviour be considered in explaining suffering in chronic pain patients. Among existing instruments concerning spouse's responses the aspect of well behaviour has not been examined so far. The SRI (Spouse Response Inventory) tries to consider pain behaviour and well behaviour and appears to be acceptable because of its brevity and close proximity to daily language. The aim of the study is the translation into German, followed by evaluation and validation, of the SRI on a German sample of patients with chronic pain.Methods and analysesThe study is comprehensively designed: initially, the focus will lie on the translation of the instrument following the guidelines for cross-cultural translation and adaptation and evaluation of the German version according to the source study. Subsequently, a validation referring to predictive, incremental and construct validation will be conducted using instruments based on similar or close but different constructs. Evaluation of the resulting SRI-G (SRI-German) will be conducted on a sample of at least 30 patients with chronic pain attending a comprehensive pain centre. For validation at least 120 patients with chronic headache, back pain, cancer related pain and somatoform pain disorder shall be included, for a total of 480 patients. Separate analyses according to specific pain diagnoses will be performed to ensure psychometric property, interpretability and control of diagnosis of specific limitations. Analyses will include comprehensive investigation of psychometric property of the scale by hierarchical regression analyses, correlation analyses, multivariate analysis of variance and exploratory factor analyses (SPSS).EthicsThe study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Dresden (EK 335 122008) based on the Helsinki declaration.

Project description:Objectives: The implementation of obstetric hybrid simulation and interprofessional collaboration between midwives and anesthetists in labor emergencies fostered the need to evaluate the impact of such a program. The original Interprofessional Attitude Scale (IPAS) assesses interprofessional attitudes among health professional students and includes the 2011 and 2016 Interprofessional Collaborative Practice report competency domains. The purpose of this study was to create a German version of the IPAS (G-IPAS) to use for the education of healthcare students. Methods: We performed the translation and validation of the IPAS in five steps: translation to German according to the International Society of Pharmaeconomics and Outcome Research guidelines; nine cognitive interviews with healthcare professionals and students;calculation of the Content Validity Index (CVI) by expert opinion; exploratory factor analysis (EFA); and internal consistency by Cronbach's alpha. All study participants gave written informed consent and the cantonal ethics committee waived further ethical approval. Results: The cognitive interviews led to replacement of single-item wording. We retained 27 items for CVI analysis. The averaged overall CVI was 0.79, with 15 items ?0.89. 185 students (70 medicine, 51 nursing, 48 physiotherapy, and 16 midwifery) contributed with data for the EFA and it produced three subscales. "Teamwork, roles, and responsibilities" with factor loadings ?0.49, "Patient-centeredness" with factor loadings ?0.31, and "Community-centeredness" with factor loadings ?0.57. Two items of the total scale were deleted, and four items were redistributed to another subscale. Cronbach's alpha for the overall G-IPAS scale was 0.87. After deleting and redistributing items in subscales, a new Scale-CVI/Average was calculated and was 0.82. Conclusions: Based on a rigorous validation process, the G-IPAS provides a reliable tool to assess attitudes towards interprofessional education among different healthcare professions in German-speaking countries.

Project description:BackgroundAchilles tendinopathy is the predominant overuse injury in runners. To further investigate this overload injury in transverse and longitudinal studies a valid, responsive and reliable outcome measure is demanded. Most questionnaires have been developed for English-speaking populations. This is also true for the VISA-A score, so far representing the only valid, reliable, and disease specific questionnaire for Achilles tendinopathy. To internationally compare research results, to perform multinational studies or to exclude bias originating from subpopulations speaking different languages within one country an equivalent instrument is demanded in different languages. The aim of this study was therefore to cross-cultural adapt and validate the VISA-A questionnaire for German-speaking Achilles tendinopathy patients.MethodsAccording to the "guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures" the VISA-A score was cross-culturally adapted into German (VISA-A-G) using six steps: Translation, synthesis, back translation, expert committee review, pretesting (n = 77), and appraisal of the adaptation process by an advisory committee determining the adequacy of the cross-cultural adaptation. The resulting VISA-A-G was then subjected to an analysis of reliability, validity, and internal consistency in 30 Achilles tendinopathy patients and 79 asymptomatic people. Concurrent validity was tested against a generic tendon grading system (Percy and Conochie) and against a classification system for the effect of pain on athletic performance (Curwin and Stanish).ResultsThe "advisory committee" determined the VISA-A-G questionnaire as been translated "acceptable". The VISA-A-G questionnaire showed moderate to excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.60 to 0.97). Concurrent validity showed good coherence when correlated with the grading system of Curwin and Stanish (rho = -0.95) and for the Percy and Conochie grade of severity (rho 0.95). Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) for the total VISA-A-G scores of the patients was calculated to be 0.737.ConclusionThe VISA-A questionnaire was successfully cross-cultural adapted and validated for use in German speaking populations. The psychometric properties of the VISA-A-G questionnaire are similar to those of the original English version. It therefore can be recommended as a sufficiently robust tool for future measuring clinical severity of Achilles tendinopathy in German speaking patients.

Project description:BackgroundA psychometrically robust measurement instrument is prerequisite to tailor and monitor interventions aiming to improve evidence-based practice (EBP). The recently developed "Evidence-based Practice Inventory" (EBPI) questionnaire (five dimensions) provides a sound inventory for a comprehensive assessment of adherence to EBP, and identification of barriers and facilitators for EBP. The aims of this study were to establish a German language version of the EBPI and to examine the instrument's reliability in a diverse sample of healthcare professionals.MethodsThe English version of the EBPI was translated, adopted and subsequently test-retest reliability of the German language EBPI was examined in a nationwide online survey. Participants working in Germany were invited to complete the questionnaire twice. For each EBPI dimension, internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha) and the relative test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC) were calculated. The standard error of measurement, limits of agreement and minimal detectable change values were estimated to quantify measurement error.ResultsA German language version of the EBPI was established. In the online survey, the EBPI was initially completed by 889 healthcare professionals. At follow-up, 344 individuals (39%) completed the questionnaire (74% female; mean work experience: 13.6 years). The ICCs for the five dimensions varied between 0.78 and 0.86. The standard error of measurement varied between 6.5 and 8.8% of the respective dimension scale range, and the limits of agreement between 24 and 37%. For internal consistency reliability, alpha varied between 0.64 and 0.90. There were neither floor nor ceiling effects, nor any other relevant feasibility issues.ConclusionsThe German language EBPI can be used to assess EBP adherence of healthcare professionals in clinical practice, and to identify barriers and facilitators for an EBP conform behaviour. Results on test-retest reliability indicate that the EBPI produces reliable scores when used for group comparisons, but the questionnaire seems insufficiently reliable for individual measurements over time. Methods of item response theory or Rasch measurement theory should be used for further evaluation and revision of the EBPI, informed by the results of this study.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00013792 ). Registered 19 January 2018.