Reliability and validity of the Dutch adaptation of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale

被引:123
作者
Schoppink, LEM
vanTulder, MW
Koes, BW
Beurskens, SAJHM
deBie, RA
机构
[1] FREE UNIV AMSTERDAM,INST RES EXTRAMURAL MED,AMSTERDAM,NETHERLANDS
[2] UNIV LIMBURG,DEPT EPIDEMIOL,6200 MD MAASTRICHT,NETHERLANDS
来源
PHYSICAL THERAPY | 1996年 / 76卷 / 03期
关键词
functional status; low back pain; measurement scale; reliability; validity;
D O I
10.1093/ptj/76.3.268
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Purpose. The purposes of this study were to determine whether a Dutch translation of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (CBPDS) retains the high levels of reliability and validity of the original English version and to determine whether it is therefore more practical to translate this scale, and possibly other scales, than to generate language- and culture-specific instruments. Subjects. Subjects were 120 individuals with chronic low back pain. Methods. The QBPDS was filled out at the beginning of the study, after 1 week, and after 4 months. Reliability was determined by calculating Pearson correlation coefficients and intraclass correlation coefficients in addition to Cronbach's alpha and item-total correlation at the beginning of the study and after 4 months. Validity was examined by correlating the QBPDS scores to external criteria scores at a single point in time (cross-sectional) and over a period of time (longitudinal). Results. Pearson and intraclass correlation coefficients for test-retest reliability were .90. Cronbach's alpha was .95. The cross-sectional construct validity coefficients were .80 (RDQ) and .70 (pain severity). The longitudinal construct validity coefficients were .60 (RDQ), .53 (pain severity), and .35 (course of the complaint). Conclusion and Discussion. Our results support previous findings of the English and French versions of the QBPDS. Whether this instrument can be used as an evaluative instrument remains unknown.
引用
收藏
页码:268 / 275
页数:8
相关论文
共 20 条
[1]   STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310
[2]  
BOMBARDIER C, 1987, J RHEUMATOL, V14, P6
[3]  
DEYO RA, 1988, ARCH PHYS MED REHAB, V69, P1044
[4]   MEASURING FUNCTIONAL OUTCOMES IN THERAPEUTIC TRIALS FOR CHRONIC DISEASE [J].
DEYO, RA .
CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1984, 5 (03) :223-240
[5]   ASSESSING THE RESPONSIVENESS OF FUNCTIONAL SCALES TO CLINICAL-CHANGE - AN ANALOGY TO DIAGNOSTIC-TEST PERFORMANCE [J].
DEYO, RA ;
CENTOR, RM .
JOURNAL OF CHRONIC DISEASES, 1986, 39 (11) :897-906
[6]  
Fleiss J. L., 1999, The Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments, DOI [DOI 10.1002/9781118032923, 10.1002/9781118032923]
[7]   ETIOLOGICAL THEORIES AND TREATMENTS FOR CHRONIC BACK PAIN .1. SOMATIC MODELS AND INTERVENTIONS [J].
FLOR, H ;
TURK, DC .
PAIN, 1984, 19 (02) :105-121
[8]   MEASURING HEALTH-STATUS - WHAT ARE THE NECESSARY MEASUREMENT PROPERTIES [J].
GUYATT, GH ;
KIRSHNER, B ;
JAESCHKE, R .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1992, 45 (12) :1341-1345
[9]   A METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING HEALTH INDEXES [J].
KIRSHNER, B ;
GUYATT, G .
JOURNAL OF CHRONIC DISEASES, 1985, 38 (01) :27-36
[10]   THE QUEBEC BACK PAIN DISABILITY SCALE - MEASUREMENT PROPERTIES [J].
KOPEC, JA ;
ESDAILE, JM ;
ABRAHAMOWICZ, M ;
ABENHAIM, L ;
WOODDAUPHINEE, S ;
LAMPING, DL ;
WILLIAMS, JI .
SPINE, 1995, 20 (03) :341-352