Is it time to rethink disability assessment in low back pain? Reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity of the Brazilian WHODAS 2.0 for chronic low back pain

被引:1
作者
Castro e Silva, Tuyra Francisca [1 ,2 ]
Medeiros, Paula Maciel de Sousa Silva [3 ]
Leite, Camila Ferreira [1 ]
Castro, Shamyr Sulyvan [1 ,4 ]
Nunes, Ana Carla Lima [1 ]
Jesus-Moraleida, Fabianna Resende [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Fed Ceara, Master Program Physiotherapy & Functioning, Fortaleza, Brazil
[2] Fed Inst Educ Sci & Technol Ceara, Fortaleza, Brazil
[3] Univ Fortaleza UNIFOR, Washington Soares Ave, Fortaleza, Brazil
[4] Univ Fed Ceara, Master Program Publ Hlth, Fortaleza, Brazil
关键词
functioning; low back pain; patient-reported outcome measures; validation; FEAR-AVOIDANCE BELIEFS; PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES; ROLAND-MORRIS; HEALTH-STATUS; QUESTIONNAIRE; CLASSIFICATION; POPULATION; ADAPTATION; VALIDATION; GUIDELINES;
D O I
10.1002/pri.2025
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
Background and Purpose: The World Health Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) was developed to assess health and disability based on the biopsychosocial model. The WHODAS 2.0 has not been validated for Brazilians with chronic non- specific low back pain (LBP). We aimed to evaluate the reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity of the Brazilian version of the WHODAS 2.0 in patients with chronic LBP. Methods: Methodological study. The Brazilian version of the WHODAS 2.0 was applied to 100 volunteers with chronic nonspecific LBP. Test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity were assessed using the Spearman correlation test, Cronbach's alpha (a) coefficient, and Spearman's correlation test between WHODAS 2.0, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), respectively. Results: WHODAS 2.0 showed satisfactory test-retest reliability with a moderate correlation for total WHODAS 2.0 (r = 0.75, p < 0.05). Internal consistency was adequate for all domains and total score (a = 0.82-0.96). Regarding construct validity, WHODAS 2.0, ODI (r = 0.70, p < 0.05), and WHODAS 2.0 and RMDQ (r = 0.71, p < 0.05) had significant correlations. Total WHODAS 2.0 and FABQ-Phys subscale scores correlated moderately (r = 0.66, p < 0.05). Discussion: The Brazilian WHODAS 2.0 was proved to be a valid and reliable tool for patients with chronic LBP. The item referring to sexual intercourse had 27% and 30% of the missing values during the test and retest stage, respectively and had a high percentage of missing data for work- related questions (41% missing data) in the life activities domain; therefore, the data must be interpreted with caution. Implications for Physiotherapy Practice: WHODAS 2.0 can be used as a disability assessment strategy from a biopsychosocial perspective in this population.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   World Health Organisation Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0): development and validation of the Nigerian Igbo version in patients with chronic low back pain [J].
Igwesi-Chidobe, Chinonso Nwamaka ;
Kitchen, Sheila ;
Sorinola, Isaac Olubunmi ;
Godfrey, Emma Louise .
BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2020, 21 (01)
[22]   The Italian version of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity in patients with chronic low back pain [J].
Monticone, Marco ;
Frigau, Luca ;
Mola, Francesco ;
Rocca, Barbara ;
Franchignoni, Franco ;
Vullo, Salvatore Simone ;
Foti, Calogero ;
Chiarotto, Alessandro .
EUROPEAN SPINE JOURNAL, 2020, 29 (03) :530-539
[23]   Convergent and known group validity of the STarT Back Tool in a Nigerian population with chronic low back pain [J].
Mbada, Chidozie Emmanuel ;
Ojo, Joshua Oluwafunmibi ;
Idowu, Opeyemi Ayodiipo ;
Afolabi, Taofik Oluwasegun ;
Afolabi, Aanuoluwapo Deborah ;
Oke, Kayode Israel ;
Sonuga, Oluwatobi Ademola ;
Karstens, Sven ;
Fatoye, Francis .
PHYSIOSCIENCE, 2021, 17 (02) :75-81
[24]   Psychometric Properties of the Polish Version of the 36-Item WHODAS 2.0 in Patients with Low Back Pain [J].
Cwirlej-Sozanska, Agnieszka ;
Bejer, Agnieszka ;
Wisniowska-Szurlej, Agnieszka ;
Wilmowska-Pietruszynska, Anna ;
de Sire, Alessandro ;
Spalek, Renata ;
Sozanski, Bernard .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH, 2020, 17 (19) :1-17
[25]   ASSOCIATION BETWEEN CATASTROPHIZING AND SELF-RATED PAIN AND DISABILITY IN PATIENTS WITH CHRONIC LOW BACK PAIN [J].
Meyer, Kathrin ;
Tschopp, Alois ;
Sprott, Haiko ;
Mannion, Anne Frances .
JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION MEDICINE, 2009, 41 (08) :620-625
[26]   Evaluation of the correlation between the Istanbul Low Back Pain Disability Index, Back Pain Functional Scale and other back pain disability scales in Turkish patients with low back pain [J].
Karadag, Ahmet ;
Canbas, Muhammed .
JOURNAL OF BACK AND MUSCULOSKELETAL REHABILITATION, 2022, 35 (04) :771-775
[27]   The Psychological Inflexibility in Pain Scale (PIPS): Validity and Reliability of the Japanese Version for Chronic Low Back Pain and Knee Pain [J].
Nagasawa, Yasuhiro ;
Shibata, Ai ;
Fukamachi, Hanako ;
Ishii, Kaori ;
Wicksell, Rikard K. ;
Oka, Koichiro .
JOURNAL OF PAIN RESEARCH, 2021, 14 :325-332
[28]   Correlation between Oswestry disability index and 12-item self-administered version of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0) in patients with chronic low back pain [J].
Barlund, Esa T. ;
Katajapuu, Niina K. ;
Paltamaa, Jaana P. ;
Saltychev, Mikhail M. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION RESEARCH, 2021, 44 (02) :170-172
[29]   Dimensionality, reliability, and validity of the Finnish version of the pain catastrophizing scale in chronic low back pain [J].
Mikkonen, Jani ;
Leinonen, Ville ;
Laehdeoja, Tuomas ;
Holopainen, Riikka ;
Ekstroem, Kristian ;
Koho, Petteri ;
Airaksinen, Olavi ;
Luciano, Juan V. ;
Navarrete, Jaime ;
Neblett, Randy .
SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2024, 24 (01)
[30]   Minimal important difference of the 12-item World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 in persons with chronic low back pain [J].
Jessica J. Wong ;
Sheilah Hogg-Johnson ;
Wouter De Groote ;
Agnieszka Ćwirlej-Sozańska ;
Olatz Garin ;
Montse Ferrer ;
Àngels Pont Acuña ;
Pierre Côté .
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, 31