Literature DB >> 28658044

The Modified Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire: Reliability, Validity, and Responsiveness of a Dutch Language Version.

Lenie Denteneer1, Ulrike Van Daele1, Steven Truijen1, Willem De Hertogh1, Jill Meirte1, Kristiaan Deckers2, Gaetane Stassijns3.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study is to translate the English version of the Modified Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (MDQ) into a Dutch version and investigate its clinimetric properties for patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain (CLBP). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Fritz et al (2001) developed a modified version of the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODI) to assess functional status and named it the MDQ. In this version, a question regarding employment and homemaking ability was substituted for the question related to sex life. Good clinimetric properties for the MDQ were identified but up until now it is not clear whether the clinimetric properties of the MDQ would change if it was translated into a Dutch version.
METHODS: Translation of the MDQ into Dutch was done in 4 steps. Test-retest reliability was investigated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) model. Validity was calculated using Pearson correlations and a 2-way analysis of variance for repeated measures. Finally, responsiveness was calculated with the area under the curve (AUC), minimal detectable change (MDC), and the standardized response mean (SRM).
RESULTS: A total of 80 completed questionnaires were collected in 3 different hospitals and a total of 43 patients finished a 9 weeks intervention period, completing the retest. Test-retest reliability was excellent with an ICC of 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-0.95). To confirm the convergent validity, the MDQ answered all predefined hypothesises (r = -0.65-0.69/P = 0.01-0.00) and good results for construct validity were found (P = 0.02). The MDQ had an AUC of 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47-0.81), an MDC of 8.80 points, and a SRM of 0.65.
CONCLUSION: The Dutch version of the MDQ shows good clinimetric properties and is shown to be usable in the assessment of the functional status of Dutch-speaking patients with nonspecific CLBP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28658044     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002304

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  4 in total

1.  Letter to the editor concerning "Do we have the right PROMs for measuring outcomes in lumbar spinal surgery?" by O.M. Stokes et al. Eur Spine J (2017) 26:816-824.

Authors:  Lenie Denteneer; Ulrike Van Daele; Steven Truijen; Willem De Hertogh; Jill Meirte; Gaetane Stassijns
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-10-20       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  The Role of Fear-Avoidance Beliefs on Low Back Pain-Related Disability in a Developing Socioeconomic and Conservative Culture: A Cross-Sectional Study of a Pakistani Population.

Authors:  Muhammad Naseeb Ullah Khan; Natalie M V Morrison; Paul W Marshall
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2020-09-23       Impact factor: 3.133

3.  Urdu version of Oswestry disability index; a reliability and validity study.

Authors:  Fareeha Amjad; Mohammad A Mohseni-Bandpei; Syed Amir Gilani; Ashfaq Ahmad; Muhammad Waqas; Asif Hanif
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 2.362

4.  Cross-cultural adaptation and psychometric testing of the Arabic version of the Modified Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire.

Authors:  Hamad S Al Amer; Fahad Alanazi; Mohamed ELdesoky; Ayman Honin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-08       Impact factor: 3.752

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.