Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Argentine version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale in patients with chronic low back pain.

INTRODUCTION: Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Higher levels of catastrophizing were found in patients with LBP and this variable is associated with self-reported disability. The Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) is a self-report questionnaire that assesses catastrophizing in the presence of pain. Currently, an Argentine version of the PCS is not available. OBJECTIVE: To translate and cross-culturally adapt the PCS into Argentine Spanish and test the psychometric properties of the new version with chronic LBP patients. STUDY DESIGN: Study of diagnostic accuracy/assessment scale. METHODS: The study was carried out in three consecutive phases following the COSMIN guidelines: translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation. We included Argentine residents over 18 years with chronic LBP. We used the PCS and the Global rating of change (GROC) to assess the psychometric properties. RESULTS: No difficulties were present in the translation processes and the PCS-Arg was developed. The alfa Cronbach coefficient was 0.89. The standard error of measurement and the minimal detectable change were 5.4 and 15.1 points, respectively. In the explanatory factorial analysis 3 components were identified. For the construct validity, the correlation between the PCS-Arg and disability and pain were r = 0.35 and rho = 0.04, respectively. The mean PCS score was 29.9. The lowest and highest scores were 3 and 52 points, therefore, no roof or ceiling effects of the total score were observed. CONCLUSION: The PCS-Arg is a viable, reliable and valid tool for the assessment of catastrophizing in patients with chronic LBP.

Standard measurement error and minimal detectable change of the Back-PAQ ArgSpan questionnaire: Secondary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Negative attitudes and beliefs about back pain in patients with low back pain (LBP) are associated with high levels of pain and negatively influence clinical outcome. The Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaire (Back-PAQ) was developed to assess back beliefs of patients and healthcare professionals. The minimal detectable change (MDC) is defined as the smallest amount of change that can be detected not due to inherent variation or "noise" in the measure. The MDC values at 68%, 90% and 95% confidence levels of the Back-PAQ ArgSpan are unknown. OBJECTIVE: to calculate standard error measurement (SEM) and MDC to confirm the feasibility of Back-PAQ ArgSpan as a reliable outcome measure in clinical and research settings. STUDY DESIGN: a secondary analysis was carried out using a subgroup of data from the cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Argentine version of the Back PAQ. METHOD: SEM was calculated (SD × âˆš1 - ICC) and MDC as (SEM × z-value × âˆš2). MDC was calculated as percentage as well. RESULTS: the SEM was 5.16 points. The MDC68, MDC90 and MDC95 of the Back-PAQ were 7.30, 12 and 14.3 points, respectively. The percentages of MDC68, MDC90 and MDC95 of the Back-PAQ were 6.7%, 11.0% and 13.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The present study demonstrated that the Back-PAQ ArgSpan is a reliable and interpretable measurement tool. When assessing a patient, a change in the score in the Back-PAQ ArgSpan over 15 points shows a true change at 95% confidence level.

Spanish translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Argentine version of the Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: low back pain (LBP) is the main cause of years lived with disability worldwide. Psychosocial factors have been shown to be good predictors of persistent LBP. Within these, unhelpful beliefs about the back seem to be important in the development and chronicity of the symptoms. The Back Pain Attitudes Questionnaire (Back-PAQ) is an instrument that explores beliefs about the back that has been validated for people with and without back pain and healthcare professionals. However, until now, it has not been translated and validated for the Argentine population. OBJECTIVE: translate into Spanish, cross-cultural adapt and validate the Back-PAQ for the Argentine population with and without back pain. STUDY DESIGN: study of diagnostic accuracy/assessment scale. METHODS: the study was carried out in three consecutive phases: translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation. We included Argentinians aged 18 years or more. We used the Back-PAQ, modified Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (mFABQ) and the Global Rating of Change (GROC) scale to assess the psychometric properties. RESULTS: three hundred and seventy-two participants were included for the analysis. The time taken to answer and score the questionnaire was 5.6 and 1.6 min, respectively. Neither a ceiling nor a floor effect was observed. Internal consistency was 0.76. One hundred and eighty-six participants were considered stable. Test-retest reliability was 0.90. A weak correlation (0.33) was found between the Back-PAQ and the mFABQ. CONCLUSION: the Argentine version of the Back-PAQ is a viable, reliable and valid tool for the assessment of the back beliefs of the Argentine population.