OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives were to evaluate the acceptability in France of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS) in its original French-language version and to study its correlational validity against indicators of impairment, pain, disability, psychological status, and perceived health status. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-two patients with chronic low back pain were recruited at the rheumatology outpatient clinic of a French hospital. A physical examination was performed for determination of an impairment score, and scales were completed for pain (visual analog scale and Saint-Antoine Questionnaire), disability (QBPDS and Dallas Scale [DS]), perceived health status (Nottingham Health Profile, NHP), and psychological status (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS). RESULTS: Acceptability, internal consistency, and content validity of the QBPDS were satisfactory. Investigation of correlational validity showed good agreement with the DPQ (r = 0.755) and NHP (r = 0.739) and fair agreement with the impairment score (r = 0.449), the VAS pain score (r = 0.448), and the HADS score (r = 0.473). The QBPDS showed good discriminating power. Validity of the QBPDS was confirmed. DISCUSSION: Our results confirm the good measurement properties of the original French-language version of the QBPDS in French hospital-clinic patients with chronic low back pain. Comparison of the QBPDS and DPQ in this study shows that the QBPDS is better for evaluating disability, whereas the DPQ evaluates the overall, functional, psychological, and social impact of low back pain.
OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives were to evaluate the acceptability in France of the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS) in its original French-language version and to study its correlational validity against indicators of impairment, pain, disability, psychological status, and perceived health status. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-two patients with chronic low back pain were recruited at the rheumatology outpatient clinic of a French hospital. A physical examination was performed for determination of an impairment score, and scales were completed for pain (visual analog scale and Saint-Antoine Questionnaire), disability (QBPDS and Dallas Scale [DS]), perceived health status (Nottingham Health Profile, NHP), and psychological status (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, HADS). RESULTS: Acceptability, internal consistency, and content validity of the QBPDS were satisfactory. Investigation of correlational validity showed good agreement with the DPQ (r = 0.755) and NHP (r = 0.739) and fair agreement with the impairment score (r = 0.449), the VAS pain score (r = 0.448), and the HADS score (r = 0.473). The QBPDS showed good discriminating power. Validity of the QBPDS was confirmed. DISCUSSION: Our results confirm the good measurement properties of the original French-language version of the QBPDS in French hospital-clinic patients with chronic low back pain. Comparison of the QBPDS and DPQ in this study shows that the QBPDS is better for evaluating disability, whereas the DPQ evaluates the overall, functional, psychological, and social impact of low back pain.
Authors: B Cougot; A Petit; C Paget; C Roedlich; G Fleury-Bahi; M Fouquet; P Menu; C Dubois; C Geraut; Y Roquelaure; D Tripodi Journal: J Occup Med Toxicol Date: 2015-10-29 Impact factor: 2.646