Simplified Chinese Version of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire

被引:6
作者
Yao, Min [1 ]
Yang, Long [1 ,2 ]
Zhu, Bin [3 ]
Xu, Bao-ping [1 ]
Chen, Ni [4 ]
Wang, Xiao-tao [1 ]
Cheng, Shao-dan [2 ]
Wang, Yong-jun [4 ]
Cui, Xue-jun [1 ]
机构
[1] Shanghai Univ Tradit Chinese Med, Longhua Hosp, Inst Spine Dis, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[2] Shanghai Guanghua Hosp Integrated Tradit Chinese, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[3] Liuzao Community Hlth Serv Ctr, Shanghai, Peoples R China
[4] Shanghai Univ Tradit Chinese Med, Longhua Hosp, Dept Orthopaed & Traumatol, Shanghai, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
agreement; cross-cultural translation; Japanese Orthopaedic Association back pain evaluation questionnaire; minimal important change; responsiveness; simplified Chinese version; CROSS-CULTURAL ADAPTATION; GLOBAL BURDEN; TURKISH VERSION; RELIABILITY; VALIDITY; QUALITY; RESPONSIVENESS; PREVALENCE; DIFFERENCE; DISEASE;
D O I
10.1097/BRS.0000000000002692
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Study Design. Psychometric test of the cross-cultural adaptation the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) in low back pain (LBP) patients. Objective. To investigate the agreement, responsiveness, and minimal important change (MIC) of the simplified Chinese version of the JOABPEQ in LBP patients. Summary of Background Data. The factor structure, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, validity, floor and ceiling effect of simplified Chinese JOABPEQ have been tested, while the agreement, responsiveness, and MIC were required. Methods. The agreement, responsiveness, and MIC of the simplified Chinese version were assessed by completing the Chinese JOABPEQ twice. Agreement was tested with Bland-Altman plot. Responsiveness was operationalized using receiver operating characteristic analyses. The anchor-based method was used to calculate MIC. Results. One hundred sixty-two of 184 patients returned to finish the booklet twice were available for analysis (response rate: 88.0%). While the responsiveness, the area under the curves of each subscale were ranged from 0.746 to 0.875, which meant a good responsiveness. While the MIC (MIC%) of simplified Chinese JOABPEQ was 19.28 (44.98%) for Q1 Low back pain, 15.20 (24.13%) for Q2 Lumbar function, 15.79 (22.76%) for Q3 Walking ability, 9.58 (19.86%) for Q4 Social life function, 7.33 (17.28%) for Q5 Mental health. While compared with the MIC, only the Q3 Walking ability had a positive rating for agreement in the Bland-Altman plot. Conclusion. The simplified Chinese JOABPEQ has positive agreement of Q3 Walk ability and acceptable to excellent responsiveness of all the subscales. The MICs for subscales of the simplified Chinese JOABPEQ ranged from 7.33 to 19.28 points.
引用
收藏
页码:1438 / 1445
页数:8
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [1] Comparison of early and late surgical intervention for lumbar disc herniation: is earlier better?
    Akagi, Ryuichiro
    Aoki, Yasuchika
    Ikeda, Yoshikazu
    Nakajima, Fumitake
    Ohtori, Seiji
    Takahashi, Kazuhisa
    Yamagata, Masatsune
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SCIENCE, 2010, 15 (03) : 294 - 298
  • [2] The validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire: Can we implement it in Saudi Arabia?
    Alfayez, Saud Mohammed
    Bin Dous, Abdullah Nasser
    Altowim, Abdullah Abdulaziz
    Alrabiei, Qais Abdulmohsin
    Alsubaie, Bandar Obaid
    Awwad, Waleed Mohammad
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SCIENCE, 2017, 22 (04) : 618 - 621
  • [3] Altman, 1999, PRACTICAL STAT MED R
  • [4] The Japanese Orthopedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) for low back disorders: a validation study from Iran
    Azimi, Parisa
    Shahzadi, Sohrab
    Montazeri, Ali
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SCIENCE, 2012, 17 (05) : 521 - 525
  • [5] Agreed Statistics Measurement Method Comparison
    Bland, J. Martin
    Altman, Douglas G.
    [J]. ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2012, 116 (01) : 182 - 185
  • [6] Placing the global burden of low back pain in context
    Buchbinder, Rachelle
    Blyth, Fiona M.
    March, Lyn M.
    Brooks, Peter
    Woolf, Anthony D.
    Hoy, Damian G.
    [J]. BEST PRACTICE & RESEARCH IN CLINICAL RHEUMATOLOGY, 2013, 27 (05): : 575 - 589
  • [7] Understanding the minimum clinically important difference: a review of concepts and methods
    Copay, Anne G.
    Subach, Brian R.
    Glassman, Steven D.
    Polly, David W., Jr.
    Schuler, Thomas C.
    [J]. SPINE JOURNAL, 2007, 7 (05) : 541 - 546
  • [8] Minimally important change determined by a visual method integrating an anchor-based and a distribution-based approach
    de Vet, Henrica C. W.
    Ostelo, Raymond W. J. G.
    Terwee, Caroline B.
    van der Roer, Nicole
    Knol, Dirk L.
    Beckerman, Heleen
    Boers, Maarten
    Bouter, Lex M.
    [J]. QUALITY OF LIFE RESEARCH, 2007, 16 (01) : 131 - 142
  • [9] Low Back Pain Clinical Practice Guidelines Linked to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health from the Orthopaedic Section of the American Physical Therapy Association
    Delitto, Anthony
    George, Steven Z.
    Van Dillen, Linda
    Whitman, Julie M.
    Sowa, Gwendolyn
    Shekelle, Paul
    Denninger, Thomas R.
    Godges, Joseph J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC & SPORTS PHYSICAL THERAPY, 2012, 42 (04) : A1 - A57
  • [10] ASSESSING THE RESPONSIVENESS OF FUNCTIONAL SCALES TO CLINICAL-CHANGE - AN ANALOGY TO DIAGNOSTIC-TEST PERFORMANCE
    DEYO, RA
    CENTOR, RM
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CHRONIC DISEASES, 1986, 39 (11): : 897 - 906