OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the German version of the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS-PT-G). The original Dutch version is a 36-item self-report scale discriminating between a biomedical and a biopsychosocial orientation of therapists with regard to low back pain management. METHODS: The German version was generated by use of a forward-backward translation procedure. In a cross-sectional study with a repeated measurement after five weeks, a total of 424 physiotherapists got a questionnaire package with the PABS-PT-G as well as the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia and patient vignettes. Item and factor analyses served to determine the psychometric properties of the scale. RESULTS: A total of 280 physiotherapists (response rate 79%) completed the questionnaires and a principal component analysis confirmed the two subscales of the original Dutch version. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of the items belonging to the biomedical factor amounted to 0.77 and to 0.58 for the items of the biopsychosocial factor respectively. Retest reliability showed a coefficient of 0.83 for the biomedical scale and of 0.70 for the biopsychosocial scale. Validity of both subscales of the PABS-PT-G was supported by statistically significant (P<0.01) and substantial correlations with the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia and with attitudes of the physiotherapists measured by patient vignettes (r between 0.37 and 0.72). CONCLUSION: The PABS-PT-G appears to be a reliable and valid instrument, which is equivalent to the original Dutch version. Further research is proposed to improve the reliability of the biopsychosocial subscale.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the psychometric properties of the German version of the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS-PT-G). The original Dutch version is a 36-item self-report scale discriminating between a biomedical and a biopsychosocial orientation of therapists with regard to low back pain management. METHODS: The German version was generated by use of a forward-backward translation procedure. In a cross-sectional study with a repeated measurement after five weeks, a total of 424 physiotherapists got a questionnaire package with the PABS-PT-G as well as the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia and patient vignettes. Item and factor analyses served to determine the psychometric properties of the scale. RESULTS: A total of 280 physiotherapists (response rate 79%) completed the questionnaires and a principal component analysis confirmed the two subscales of the original Dutch version. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) of the items belonging to the biomedical factor amounted to 0.77 and to 0.58 for the items of the biopsychosocial factor respectively. Retest reliability showed a coefficient of 0.83 for the biomedical scale and of 0.70 for the biopsychosocial scale. Validity of both subscales of the PABS-PT-G was supported by statistically significant (P<0.01) and substantial correlations with the Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia and with attitudes of the physiotherapists measured by patient vignettes (r between 0.37 and 0.72). CONCLUSION: The PABS-PT-G appears to be a reliable and valid instrument, which is equivalent to the original Dutch version. Further research is proposed to improve the reliability of the biopsychosocial subscale.
Authors: Alessandro Chiarotto; Annette Bishop; Nadine E Foster; Kirsty Duncan; Ebenezer Afolabi; Raymond W Ostelo; Muirne C S Paap Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 3.240