Evaluation of two time-specific back pain outcome measures.

STUDY DESIGN: Postal questionnaire to individuals with back pain. OBJECTIVE: To assess the acceptability, validity, and reliability of two existing back pain outcome measures, the Roland-Morris Questionnaire and the Von Korff scales, modified to measure the preceding 4 weeks. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The ideal outcome measure for studies of low back pain and disability remains elusive. Most existing measures assess current pain and disability. Measuring these factors over a preceding 4-week period may be more appropriate. METHODS: Individuals with back pain identified in a community survey were asked to complete the modified questionnaires. Validity was assessed by comparison with the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36 and two general comparator questions on self-reported pain and disability. Repeatability was assessed using retest questionnaires. RESULTS: Completed questionnaires were returned by 95 individuals with chronic back pain. The modified Roland-Morris Questionnaire and Von Korff pain and Von Korff disability scales were completed satisfactorily by 83 (87%), 89 (94%), and 87 (92%) participants, respectively. Mean scores of the modified measures changed significantly and in a predictable manner with increasing ratings of pain and disability. They also correlated with aspects of the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36 questionnaire. Retest data suggest that these measures are repeatable. The modified Roland-Morris Questionnaire provided adequate analyzable data only if missing values were imputed, and it explained less of the variance in the comparator questions than the modified Von Korff scales. CONCLUSIONS: The modified Von Korff scales were completed easily and appear to be valid and repeatable in this format.     

Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 1: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity

Patient-orientated assessment methods are of paramount importance in the evaluation of treatment outcome. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is one of the condition-specific questionnaires recommended for use with back pain patients. To date, no German version has been published in the peer-reviewed literature. A cross-cultural adaptation of the ODI for the German language was carried out, according to established guidelines. One hundred patients with chronic low-back pain (35 conservative, 65 surgical) completed a questionnaire booklet containing the newly translated ODI, along with a 0-10 pain visual analogue scale (VAS), the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, and Likert scales for disability, medication intake and pain frequency [to assess ODI's construct (convergent) validity]. Thirty-nine of these patients completed a second questionnaire within 2 weeks (to assess test-retest reliability). The intraclass correlation coefficient for the test-retest reliability of the questionnaire was 0.96. In test-retest, 74% of the individual questions were answered identically, and 21% just one grade higher or lower. The standard error of measurement (SEM) was 3.4, giving a "minimum detectable change" (MDC(95%)) for the ODI of approximately 9 points, i.e. the minimum change in an individual's score required to be considered "real change" (with 95% confidence) over and above measurement error. The ODI scores correlated with VAS pain intensity (r = 0.78, P < 0.001) and Roland Morris scores (r = 0.80, P < 0.001). The mean baseline ODI scores differed significantly between the surgical and conservative patients (P < 0.001), and between the different categories of the Likert scales for disability, medication use and pain frequency (in each case P < 0.001). Our German version of the Oswestry questionnaire is reliable and valid, and shows psychometric characteristics as good as, if not better than, the original English version. It should represent a valuable tool for use in future patient-orientated outcome studies in German-speaking lands.     

Difference in evaluation of patients with low back pain using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Score for Back Pain and the Japanese Version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire

Background  The number of patients suffering from degenerative diseases in the lumbar spine is increasing in Japan. Although various scales to measure disability or quality of life in patients with low back pain and/or lumbar diseases are currently available, it has been shown that one questionnaire is not always compatible with another. Our purpose is to evaluate the association and differences between the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score for low back pain. Methods  These two scales were examined and compared using data from 602 patients with low back pain and/or lumbar disease. The associations between the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and each subscale in the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score in back pain dominant group and leg pain dominant group, and with respect to six pathological conditions (i.e., sciatica, spondylosis, spondylolisthesis, lumbar spinal canal stenosis, muscular pain, traumatic pain) were analyzed. Results  While the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Subjective and Activities of daily living (ADL) subscale of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score showed a good correlation (r > 0.60), the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Clinical subscale showed a weak correlation (r = 0.35). Among the six pathological conditions, the correlation between the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score was the lowest (r = 0.66) in the lumbar spinal canal stenosis category. Conclusions  The clinical signs in patients with low back pain and/or lumbar diseases are not associated closely with the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. Therefore, a combination of the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score can provide wide-ranging assessment of the level of impairment in patients with low back pain and/or lumbar diseases. M. Nakamura and K. Miyamoto made equal contributions to this study     

汉译Roland-Morris功能障碍调查表评估下腰痛患者的可靠性

目的:探讨应用汉译Roland-Morris功能障碍调查表评定下腰痛患者的可靠性。方法:将Roland-Morris功能障碍调查表按一定的要求翻译成中文调查表(CRMDQ),对48例住院拟手术的下腰痛患者(男30例,女18例;年龄26～73岁,平均38.5岁),用CRMDQ、中文版Oswestry功能障碍指数(CODI)、视觉模拟评分(VAS)先后进行两次测试,间隔期2d,检测CRMDQ的可重复性;对门诊158例下腰痛患者在就诊时行CRMDQ、CODI、VAS测试,对CRMDQ与CODI、VAS测试结果进行Spearman秩相关分析。结果:CRMDQ具有良好的可重复性(r=0.945,P<0.01);在CRMDQ有效性测试中,与CODI、VAS比较显示出显著的相关性(CRMDQ-CODI:r=0.386;CRMDQ-VAS:r=0.478,P<0.05)。结论:CRMDQ测试具有良好的可重复性和有效性,可用于对下腰痛患者的功能障碍评估。     

Validation of the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire

The study was designed to validate a translated, culturally adapted questionnaire. We examined the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Questionnaire (RDQ) when assessing disability in Japanese patients with low back pain. The RDQ is a reliable, validated scale used to measure disability caused by low back pain. However, no validated Japanese version of this questionnaire is available. A series of 214 outpatients with low back pain participated in this validation study. The patients were given the RDQ and the SF-36, and assessed their pain and global rating of health. Among them, 57 who were clinically stable were given the RDQ again 2 weeks later. The reliability was examined based on the test-retest method and internal consistency. Sufficient reliability was demonstrated with a Chronbach's · coefficient of 0.85, and the reproducibility for the 30 patients was r = 0.91. The principal component analysis showed unidimensionality. The RDQ score of the 133 patients was significantly improved after treatment. The Japanese version of the RDQ is a useful scale that is easy to use with reliability, validity, and responsiveness when assessing patients with low back pain.     

Greek versions of the Oswestry and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaires

Disability questionnaires are increasingly used for clinical assessment, outcome measurement of treatment and research methodology of low back pain. Their use in different countries and cultural groups must follow certain guidelines for translation and cross-cultural adaptation. The translation of such an instrument must be tested for its reliability and validity to be applied and to allow comparability of data. The Oswestry Disability Index and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire are two disability questionnaires most commonly used as outcome measures in patients with low back pain. The two questionnaires were translated for use with the Greek population, were back translated and tested, and became available in a final version. The Greek versions of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire were tested in 697 patients with low back pain. Internal consistency reliability for the Greek translation of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire reached a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.833 and 0.885 respectively. Face validity and content validity were ensured. Concurrent validity was assessed using a six-point pain scale as a criterion. The correlation of both scales was significant. The Greek translation of these disability questionnaires provided reliable and valid instruments for the evaluation of Greek-speaking patients with low back pain.     

The Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score--a multifunctional questionnaire to measure outcome in knee arthroplasty

AIM: It was the purpose of this investigation to create a German version of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and to test its appropriateness in patients with advanced gonarthritis. METHOD: Reliability (test-retest reliability, internal consistency), validity (convergent construct validity and divergent construct validity), sensitivity to change as well as practicability and acceptance of this questionnaire were tested in 90 patients. RESULTS: The test-retest reliability was acceptably high for all subscales, it ranged between r = 0.65 and 0.78 and the questionnaire showed a high internal consistency in almost all of the subscales. The comparison to the results of the questionnaire "Short Form-12" (SF-12) as well as to the patients self-assessment of health status showed high concordance in nearly all subscales, however it was only moderate for the symptom scale. Furthermore the KOOS was able to show significant differences between patients and healthy controls. When testing the sensitivity to change, the KOOS could demonstrate significant improvements within 3 months and the instrument has shown to be practicable with a high acceptance by the patients. CONCLUSION: With the German version of the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score a multidimensional instrument is available now to measure health status as well as therapeutic effects in patients with knee problems. Modifying the subscale "symptoms" could further optimize this questionnaire in patients with advanced gonarthritis.     

Construct validity of the Chinese version of the Patient-rated Wrist Evaluation Questionnaire (PRWE-Hong Kong Version).

With increasing economic globalization, including health care, it is important to use standardized outcome measures applicable to a broad spectrum of patients in a wide array of countries. The purpose of this study was to verify construct and content validity and reliability of the Chinese version of the Patient-rated Wrist Evaluation Questionnaire (PRWE-Hong Kong version). The PRWE was translated into Chinese, and face validity was established by inviting experts and patients to participate in the panel review of the questionnaire. A correlation field study was performed using a convenience sample of 47 patients with wrist injuries. Patients were assessed at baseline and six weeks after the initial measurement. The following measures were taken: the Chinese version of the PRWE and the Medical Outcome Short Form (36) Health Survey (SF-36), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, active wrist range of motion, grip strength, and the Jebsen Hand Function Test. Statistical analysis consisted of Pearson correlation coefficients (convergent validity), factor analysis (content validity), paired t-test (convergent validity), and the Cronbach alpha (internal consistency). Clinically relevant correlations existed between "Pain at rest" and the VAS "resting pain" (r=0.785, p<0.0001) as well as between "Pain on repeated wrist movement" and the VAS "exertion pain" (r=0.872, p<0.0001). The "Physical Component Summary" of the SF-36 was found significantly correlated with the PRWE function subset total score (r=-0.618, p<0.0001), and the PRWE total score (r=-0.645, p<0.0001). The specific function subset score also correlated with the wrist flexion range (r=-0.308, p<0.0001) and the grip strength (r=-0.488, p=0.035). Two factors were found that accounted for 61% of the variance. The Cronbach alpha coefficients ranged from 0.7805 to 0.9502, indicating that the internal consistency of the questionnaire items was sound and reliable. Positive correlations between the wrist ranges of motion (ROM) and the specific function subset score showed that the function subset measured dimensions related to wrist-specific performance in activities of daily living. Factor analysis results supported the construct validity of the PRWE-Hong Kong version in wrist-injured patients. Internal consistency testing results suggested that item consistency within subset items was good and persisted over time. In conclusion, the Chinese version of the PRWE is a reliable and valid self-rated tool in measuring treatment outcome. It supplements traditional objective clinical measures and is potentially applicable in Hong Kong clinical settings.     

Removal of painful orthopaedic implants after fracture union

BACKGROUND: Persistent pain in the region of implanted hardware following fracture fixation commonly leads to implant removal. This prospective study evaluated patient outcomes and pain reduction following removal of orthopaedic hardware implanted for fracture fixation. METHODS: Sixty patients who had been treated previously for a fracture and complained of pain in the region of the fracture fixation hardware constituted the study cohort. Patients were carefully examined by the treating physician to rule out other causes of pain such as infection and nonunion. Baseline data were recorded preoperatively. Data obtained postoperatively at three, six, and twelve months included a visual analog pain scale score and results on the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment Questionnaire and the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36. At the one-year interval, a patient satisfaction questionnaire was completed and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: There were no complications associated with implant removal surgery. Three patients did not have complete follow-up, leaving a total of fifty-seven patients with complete follow-up. At one year, all patients indicated that they were satisfied, that they would have the procedure done again, and that their overall function had improved. The scores for pain on the visual analog scale decreased from a mean (and standard deviation) of 5.5 +/- 2.5 before hardware removal to 1.3 +/- 1.8 after hardware removal, with an overall improvement at one year of 76% (p = 0.00001). At one year, thirty (53%) of the fifty-seven patients had complete resolution of pain. In addition, the results on the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment Questionnaire showed a 43% improvement from baseline (p = 0.0001), and the results on the physical component of the Short Form-36 showed a similar improvement of 40% (p = 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Following fracture-healing, removal of hardware is safe with minimal risk. Improvement in pain relief and function can be expected.     

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the short musculoskeletal function assessment questionnaire: the SMFA-BR

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to translate, culturally adapt, and validate a Brazilian Portuguese version of the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment Questionnaire (SMFA-BR). METHODS: The SMFA was translated from English into Brazilian Portuguese. Translations were synthesized, translated back into English, and then submitted to a committee of clinical, psychometric, and language experts. The questionnaire was then administered to 220 trauma patients at a midsize hospital in southern Brazil. Test-retest reliability was examined at one and seven days. Scale reliability and validity were assessed, and factor structure was analyzed. RESULTS: Patients with only one region of dysfunction reported less dysfunction than did patients with two or three regions of dysfunction. Both the SMFA-BR dysfunction and the SMFA-BR bother scores had significant correlations with all Brazilian Short Form-36 (SF-36) subscales except for bodily pain. Test-retest reliabilities, as determined by intraclass correlation analyses, were 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.97, 1.00) at one day (n = 10) and 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.96, 1.00) at seven days (n = 17) for the dysfunction index and 0.99 (95% confidence interval, 0.98, 1.00) at one day (n = 10) and 0.97 (95% confidence interval, 0.97, 1.00) at seven days (n = 17) for the bother index. Cronbach alpha reliabilities were 0.95 (95% confidence interval, 0.93, 0.97) and 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.89, 0.94) for the dysfunction and bother indices, respectively. Minimal ceiling and floor effects were observed for the bother subscale only. Exploratory factor analysis yielded a three-factor structure: upper-extremity dysfunction, lower-extremity dysfunction, and bother. CONCLUSIONS: A reliable and valid Brazilian Portuguese version of the SMFA was developed. It will facilitate the examination of functional performance within a large patient population as well as allow cross-cultural comparisons.     

Validation of the North American Spine Society Instrument for assessment of health status in patients with chronic backache]

BACKGROUND: Pain and functional limitations are the chief symptoms in patients with back pain. However, standardized assessment of these domains are still not commonplace in clinical practice. The objective of this study was the cultural adaptation and validation of the North American Spine Society (NASS) Lumbar Spine Outcome Assessment Instrument for German speaking patients with back pain. METHODS: Translation and backtranslation of the NASS instrument was performed according to international recommendations. 56 consecutive inpatients with a confirmed diagnosis of dorsopathia completed a German version of the NASS instrument, the SF-36 and an established German instrument for back patients (FFbH-R). All patients completed the questionnaires 48 hours apart to assess test-retest reliability. Validity was assessed through correlation with corresponding subscales of the SF-36, the FFbH-R and a 0-10 pain numeric rating scale. Internal consistency and item-to-scale correlation served as statistics of reliability. RESULTS: The two subscales of the NASS Instrument for cervical and lumbar problems correlate significantly with the corresponding subscales of the FFbH-R and the SF-36 (r = 0.28-0.83, p < 0.05) and 0.39-0.68 (p < 0.05) with a pain numeric rating scale. Test-retest reliability demonstrated intraclass correlation coefficients between 0.82 to 0.89. CONCLUSION: The German version of the NASS Cervical and Lumbar Spine Outcome Assessment Instrument allows the standardized assessment of pain, functional limitations and neurogenic symptoms in patients with back pain and the international comparison of health states and therapeutic outcomes.     

Influence of comorbidity on self-assessment instrument scores of patients with idiopathic adhesive capsulitis

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine whether comorbid factors influence the results of self-assessment instruments completed by patients with idiopathic adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder. We hypothesized that an increased number of comorbidities would be correlated with greater pain and worse function as measured by general and shoulder-specific outcome tools. METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients with phase-II adhesive capsulitis were prospectively evaluated with use of a general health questionnaire, a visual analog pain scale, the Simple Shoulder Test, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, and the Short Form-36. There were seventy-one women and twenty-nine men, with a mean age of fifty-two years (range, thirty-six to eighty-two years). Comorbidities included medical factors (e.g., diabetes and heart disease) and social factors (e.g., tobacco use and pending litigation). Linear regression analysis was performed to determine correlations between the number of comorbidities and the results of the questionnaires. RESULTS: Patients with more comorbidities had significantly lower scores on the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (p = 0.0005) and the Short Form-36 subscale of physical function (p = 0.0009) as well as poorer scores on the Simple Shoulder Test and the Short Form-36 subscales of physical role, social function, emotional role, and mental health. Although there was no correlation between increased comorbidity and pain as measured on the visual analog scale, the comfort/pain subscale of the Short Form-36 showed a significant correlation with increased comorbidity (p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Idiopathic adhesive capsulitis is a debilitating condition. Comorbid factors have a significant effect on the pain and dysfunction (as measured on shoulder-specific and general health instruments) experienced by patients with this disorder. These findings can be applied to the evaluation of these patients and may help to identify patients who potentially require a longer treatment course or those whose outcome will be less satisfactory.     

Patient outcomes after Harrington instrumentation for idiopathic scoliosis: a 15- to 28-year evaluation

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective study was performed, using the Short Form-36 Health Survey and the Roland and Morris Disability Questionnaire, to investigate patient outcomes after fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using Harrington rod instrumentation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate health-related quality of life and low back pain in a long-term follow-up study of surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The commonly accepted surgical treatment for idiopathic evolutive scoliosis is vertebral fusion. It has been suggested that this procedure may cause low back pain and a poor quality of life over the long term. Outcome measures after surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis have focused mainly on objective parameters such as radiographic measures. However, this information has proved to be correlated only weakly with outcomes that are more relevant to patients, such as functional status and symptoms. Until recently, only a few long-term outcome studies have used standardized and validated patient-oriented tools to evaluate surgically treated patients with scoliosis. METHODS: In this study, 70 patients treated with a standard Harrington technique were recontacted and evaluated by means of self-administered questionnaires (Short Form-36 Health Survey and Roland and Morris Disability, clinical examination, and radiographic analysis. Preoperative and follow-up radiographic findings were registered. Relations between radiographic and patient-oriented data were evaluated. RESULTS: A comparison between the current sample and the Italian age-matched normative data for the Short Form-36 Health Survey showed them to have a similar pattern. Findings showed the patient-oriented outcome to be correlated inversely with the extension of vertebral fusion and the preoperative Cobb angle. CONCLUSION: Long-term follow-up evaluation of Harrington rod fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis showed no important impairment of health-related quality of life, as measured by patient-oriented evaluation.     

Psychometric validation of the adapted Traditional Chinese version of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ)

Background

Low back pain is a common health problem encountered by various populations among different countries. This prospective study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) into Traditional Chinese and to assess its validity, reliability and sensitivity in Chinese patients experiencing low back pain.

Responsiveness of the Japanese version of the patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE-J) and physical impairment measurements in evaluating recovery after treatment of ulnocarpal abutment syndrome

BackgroundWe evaluated the responsiveness of patient-derived questionnaires and physical findings in evaluating recovery after treatment of ulnocarpal abutment syndrome.MethodsPatients were assessed at their initial visit to our clinic and again 3 months after the treatment. At each visit, patients completed a Short Form-36, the Japanese Society for Surgery of the Hand version of Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH-JSSH), and the Japanese version of patient-rated wrist evaluation (PRWE-J). Grip strength, range of motion, and visual analogue scale for wrist pain were also examined at each visit. Satisfaction with treatment was questioned after 3 months using a Likert scale. Standardized response means (SRM) and effect sizes were calculated to evaluate the responsiveness.ResultsThe PRWE-J (SRM, 1.35) was the most responsive questionnaire, followed by the DASH-JSSH (SRM, 0.81) and the Short Form-36 (SRM, ?0.38 to ?1.19). Of the physical tests, grip strength (SRM, 0.81) was more responsive than range of motion (SRM, 0.01 to ?0.29). The visual analogue pain scale (SRM, 1.56) was highly responsive. Changes in the PRWE score were correlated with the satisfaction rating for the treatment.ConclusionsResponsive patient-derived scales can assist in the outcome evaluation of patients with ulnocarpal abutment syndrome.     

Translation into Greek, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH).

The purpose of this study was to translate, adapt, and validate a Greek version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) Questionnaire. The English version of DASH was translated into Greek (DASH-GR) and cultural adaptation was performed. Subsequently, psychometric properties and validity were assessed in 106 consecutive eligible patients presenting with a variety of unilateral upper limb disorders. All patients completed the Short Form 36 Health Survey questionnaire and the DASH-GR. Test-retest reliability was assessed in a subgroup of 35 patients who filled in the questionnaire seven days later. The internal consistency of the 30 items of the DASH-GR, estimated by the internal consistency coefficient (Cronbach's alpha) was 0.96. The difference between the individual scores of the initial assessment and reassessment of the DASH ranged from -6.5 to 14.5 (mean difference was 3.74 (SD+/-6.1)). The correlation coefficient between total scores of the initial assessment and reassessment was high (Pearson's r=0.918, p<0.0005) (Kentall tau-b=0.72, p<0.001). The correlation coefficient between the DASH-GR and SF-36 total scores was 0.625 (p<0.001), showing a strong correlation between the two questionnaires. The Greek version of the DASH retains the characteristics of the English original and is a reliable and valid instrument that can provide a standardized measure of patient-centered outcomes in Greek-speaking patients with unilateral disorders of the upper limb.     

The Pediatric Musculoskeletal Functional Health Questionnaire. A function assessment questionnaire for detection of illnesses of the locomotor system in children and adolescents--initial results of validating a German version

AIM: It was the purpose of this investigation to create a German version of the Pediatric Musculoskeletal Functional Health Questionnaire and to test its reliability, practicability and acceptance in children and adolescents with musculoskeletal disorders. METHODS: In a first step, the Pediatric Musculoskeletal Functional Health Questionnaire was translated into the German language. Then 147 patients with musculoskeletal disorders or respectively, their parents were asked to fill in the questionnaire, in order to test the reliability, the internal consistency, the practicability, and the acceptance of this instrument. RESULTS: The test-retest reliability for the subscales was high, it ranged between r = 0.56 and 0.93. Concerning the internal consistency of items and subscales we found only moderate results. The acceptance of the Questionnaire was high in patients or, respectively, their parents with 92%. Furthermore, the instrument has shown to be practicable and economical. CONCLUSION: With the German version of the Pediatric Musculoskeletal Functional Health Questionnaire a multidimensional instrument is now available that reliably measures health status as well as therapeutic effects in children and adolescents with musculoskeletal disorders.     

Translation and validation of the German version of the foot and ankle outcome score

Purpose

Outcome assessment is critical in evaluating the efficacy of orthopaedic procedures. The Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS) is a 42-item questionnaire divided into five subscales, which has been validated in several languages. Germany has no validated outcome score for general foot and ankle pathology. The aim of this study was to develop a German version of the FAOS and to investigate its psychometric properties.

Materials and methods

Forward and backward translation was executed according to official guidelines. The final version of the FAOS was investigated in 150 patients with various foot and ankle disorders. All patients completed the FAOS, Short Form-36, numeric rating scales for pain and disability, and the Hannover questionnaire. The FAOS was re-administered after 1 week. Test–retest reliability, internal consistency, minimal detectable change, construct validity, and floor and ceiling effects were analyzed.

Results

Test–retest reliability and internal consistency of each subscale were excellent (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.88–0.95; Cronbach’s α, 0.94–0.98). The minimal detectable changes of each subscale were 17.1–20.8 at the individual level and 2.0–2.4 at group level. There were moderate to strong correlations between FAOS subscales and physical outcomes and low to moderate correlations between FAOS subscales and mental outcomes. Floor and ceiling effects were not present.

Conclusion

The German version of the FAOS is a reliable and valid instrument for use in foot and ankle patients.     

Italian version of the Roland Disability Questionnaire,specific for low back pain: cross-cultural adaptation and validation

Over the last 10 years, patient-oriented evaluations using questionnaires have become an important aspect of clinical spinal outcome studies. Any questionnaire must be translated and culturally adapted in order to be used with different language groups, and the translated version must then be evaluated for reliability and validity, which are fundamental attributes of any measurement tool. The Roland Disability Questionnaire, a low back pain disease-specific tool, was submitted to translation into Italian and to cross-cultural adaptation following the Guillemin criteria. It was then validated on 70 patients (37 male and 33 female; mean age 58, range: 28-67) suffering from low back pain as assessed by clinical examination, imaging and also electromyography in cases of suspected neurological impairment. The test-retest reliability, assessed with intraclass correlation, was 0.92 and the internal consistency reached a Cronbach's alpha of 0.82. The Italian version of the Roland Disability Questionnaire satisfied the validation criteria, showing characteristics of reliability and validity similar to previously published versions translated and adapted for other countries.     

Validation of the Turkish version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for use in low back pain

STUDY DESIGN: A reliability and validity study of a previously translated version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ). OBJECTIVES: To validate the Turkish version of the RMDQ for use in low back pain. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Clinical and epidemiologic research related to low back pain in the Turkish population would be facilitated by the availability of well-established outcome measures. METHODS: A total of 81 outpatients with low back pain, 64 of whom were followed up on a second occasion, were assessed by the RMDQ. Reliability was assessed using internal consistency and the intraclass correlation coefficient. Internal construct validity was assessed by Rasch analysis; external construct validity was assessed by association with pain and spinal movement. Responsiveness was tested by both the nonparametric and parametric effect sizes. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the RMDQ is found to be adequate (>0.85) at both times, with high intraclass correlation coefficient also at both time points. Internal construct validity of the scale is good, indicating a single underlying construct. Expected associations with pain confirm external construct validity. There is little evidence of differential item functioning. The scale is at the ordinal level. Responsiveness of the RMDQ is good and greater than observed change in spinal movement. CONCLUSIONS: The RMDQ is a robust unidimensional ordinal measure, largely free of differential item functioning, which works well in the Turkish population. Nonparametric effect sizes of ordinal scales are found to overestimate or underestimate the true effect size depending on the nature of the scale and the distribution of patients at baseline.