Cross-cultural adaptation of Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire needs to assess the measurement properties: a systematic review

Psychometric Properties of Chosen Scales Evaluating Disability in Low Back Pain-Narrative Review

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most common disabling conditions. This disability significantly reduces the quality of life of LBP patients. This article reviews the most common and well-known measures currently used to assess disability in LBP, such as the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS), the Low Back Outcome Score (LBOS), and the Low Back Pain Rating Scale (LBPRS). To reliably evaluate questionnaires and other measurement methods, there are parameters known as psychometric properties, which consist primarily of the validity, reliability and sensitivity. These methods are based on a multi-item questionnaire assessing physical functioning that is completed independently by the patient. They can be used to assess the disability associated with many conditions. All are specific to LBP, and their psychometric properties have been tested on a relevant population of patients with the condition and published in peer-reviewed publications.

To what degree patient-reported symptoms of central sensitization, kinesiophobia, disability, sleep, and life quality associated with 24-h heart rate variability and actigraphy measurements?

OBJECTIVES

Chronic musculoskeletal pain is associated with decreased parasympathetic and increased sympathetic activity in the autonomic nervous system. The objective of this study was to determine the associations between objective measures of heart rate variability (a measure of autonomic nervous system function), actigraphy (a measure of activity and sleep quality), respiration rates, and subjective patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of central sensitization, kinesiophobia, disability, the effect of pain on sleep, and life quality.

METHODS

Thirty-eight study subjects were divided into two subgroups, including low symptoms of central sensitization (n = 18) and high symptoms of central sensitization (n = 20), based on patient-reported scores on the Central Sensitization Inventory (CSI). Heart rate variability (HRV) and actigraphy measurements were carried out simultaneously in 24 h measurement during wakefulness and sleep.

RESULTS

A decrease in HRV during the first 2 h of sleep was stronger in the low CSI subgroup compared to the high CSI subgroup. Otherwise, all other HRV and actigraphy parameters and subjective measures of central sensitization, disability, kinesiophobia, the effect of pain on sleep, and quality of life showed only little associations.

DISCUSSION

The high CSI subgroup reported significantly more severe symptoms of disability, kinesiophobia, sleep, and quality of life compared to the low CSI subgroup. However, there were only small and nonsignificant trend in increased sympathetic nervous system activity and poorer sleep quality on the high central sensitization subgroup. Moreover, very little differences in respiratory rates were found between the groups.

Review of the Most Cited Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (PROM) Studies Published in the Neurospine Surgical Literature

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are validated tools that are widely utilized in research and patient care. Their diversity, quality, and application remain matters of peak research interest. This article is a review of the PROMs that were utilized in high-impact publications in the neurospine surgical literature. The 50 most cited articles on the subject were selected and analysed. Most (42 articles) were published in spine journals and, in particular, in the journal Spine (Phila Pa 1976) (28 articles). A total of 34 PROMs were utilized, of which 24 were used only once in single studies. The four most common PROMs were Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) (15 articles), Short Form-12 and Short Form-36 (SF-12 and SF-36) (11 articles), Ronald-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) (nine articles), and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (five articles). Nineteen articles focused on validating translated versions of 11 PROMs to other languages. The languages that had the maximal number of tools translated to amongst the highly cited articles were Italian (six tools), Portuguese (four tools), German (three tools), and Japanese (three tools). The most common diagnoses and the PROMs used for them were back pain and cervical spine disorder (SF-12 and SF-36 (nine articles), RMDQ (eight articles), and ODI (five articles)), and idiopathic scoliosis (SRS-22) (14 articles)). The median (range) article citation number was 137 (78-675). The four most cited PROMs were SRS-22 (2,869), SF-12 and SF-36 (2,558), RMDQ (1,456), and ODI (852). Citation numbers were positively impacted by article age and participant number but not by tool type or clinical diagnosis. In conclusion, a wide range of PROMs was utilized in the 50 most cited publications in the neurospine surgical literature. The majority were disease-specific rather than generic and targeted particular spine pathology. Neurosurgical PROMs were under-represented amongst the most cited articles. Awareness of the PROMs used in high-impact studies may be helpful in tool selection in future research. PROMs are valuable in standardizing subjective outcomes. Their use in research and clinical settings in any validated language is highly encouraged.

A novel physical functioning test to complement subjective questionnaires in chronic low back pain assessments

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Lifting disability commonly affects patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and may not correlate with the existing lifting-related physical assessment tests, such as the loaded forward reach (LFR) test.

PURPOSE

The Lift and Place (LAP) test was developed to assess lifting disability in CLBP based on known risk factors. The LAP test was compared with established physical assessment test, including the LFR test and self-reported disability questionnaires.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This cross-sectional study measured self-reported disability questionnaires along with LAP and other physical assessment test results PATIENT SAMPLE: Eighty three CLBP and 82 asymptomatic participants aged 18 to 55 with normal BMI according to WHO classification.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Oswestry disability index (ODI), Roland-Morris disability questionnaire (RMDQ), Numerical Pain Rating Scale, Trunk Extensor Endurance test, 5 Repetition Sit-To-Stand test, LAP and LFR test.

METHODS

Physical assessment test scores were compared between the two groups. The correlation of assessment test scores with ODI and RMDQ in patients with CLBP was calculated. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to calculate the area under the curve (AUC) of each assessment tests. Assessment tests, ODI, and RMDQ were measured twice for CLBP patients on separate days to calculate the test-retest intraclass correlation (ICC) reliability. Two researchers scored the assessment tests independently to calculate the inter-rater ICC.

RESULTS

Patients with CLBP were slower in the LAP test (CLBP vs asymptomatic: 21.6±4.9 s vs 18.6±3.6 s) and had shorter reach in the LFR test (CLBP vs asymptomatic: 33.6±6.0 cm vs 36.3±6.6 cm). The LAP was correlated with both ODI (r=0.418) and RMDQ (r=0.390), while the LFR was not. In the ROC analysis, the LAP and LFR bore AUCs of 0.685 and 0.379, respectively. Their test-retest ICCs were 0.913 and 0.858, and their inter-rater ICCs were 0.997 and 0.969, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The LAP test demonstrated higher reliability and significant correlation with the ODI and RMDQ, indicating its potential as performance assessment for lifting disability in CLBP. Further studies should investigate the use of LAP and other physical assessments for rapid CLBP screening.

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Amharic version of Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire in people with low back pain in Ethiopia

PURPOSE

Cross-culturally translate, adapt, and validate Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) in Amharic language in Ethiopia.

METHODS

The English version RMDQ was translated into Amharic and back-translated into English. An expert review committee reviewed the translations and created Amharic version of the RMDQ (RMDQ-Am). Pilot testing and cognitive debriefing of the RMDQ-Am were conducted with a sample of 20 individuals with LBP. The RMDQ-Am was administered to 240 individuals with LBP from three rehabilitation centers to determine its psychometric properties. Internal consistency of the tool was determined by Cronbach's alpha. Test-retest reliability was determined by the Intraclass correlation coefficient. The Standard Error of Measurement (SEM), Minimum Detectable Change (MDC), and the Bland Altman Limit of Agreement (LOA) was also determined. The Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) Bodily Pain and Physical Functioning subscales were used to assess convergent validity. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was used to determine the dimensionality of the tool.

RESULTS

RMDQ-Am demonstrated good internal consistency (α = 0.88), excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.91), SEM (1.64), MDC (3.55), and good LOA. There is a significant moderate correlation between RMDQ-Am and the Physical Functioning (Rho = -0.62, p < 0.01) and Bodily Pain (BP) (Rho = -0.41, p < 0.01) subscales of the SF-36. Exploratory Factor Analysis demonstrates that the Amharic version of RMDQ is a primary one and secondary four-factor model [The Kaiser Meyer Olkin = 0.877, X² (df) =1413.278/190, p < 0.001].

CONCLUSION

RMDQ-Am is a reliable and valid tool that can be used in both clinical practice and research with the Ethiopian LBP population.IMPLICATION FOR REHABILITATIONDespite LBP being a concern in Ethiopia, the magnitude of disability related to this phenomenon is not studied in the country, mainly due to the absence of validated LBP specific patient-reported outcome measures such as the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ).The RMDQ was successfully translated, adapted, and validated into the Amharic language and the Ethiopian context (RMDQ-Am).The RMDQ-Am is a reliable outcome measure among the Ethiopian population with LBP, as demonstrated by the good internal consistency (α = 0.88) and excellent test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.91).There is a moderate negative correlation between the RMDQ-Am and the Physical Functioning (Rho = -0.62, p < 0.01) and Bodily Pain (Rho = -0.41, p < 0.01) subscales of the SF-36.The RMDQ-Am can be used in clinical and research settings to measure LBP-related disability and its impact among individuals living with LBP in Ethiopia.

Construct validity and responsiveness of commonly used patient reported outcome instruments in decompression for lumbar spinal stenosis

BACKGROUND

Validity and responsiveness of Oswestry disability index (ODI), Roland Morris disability questionnaires (RMDQ), Short Form-12 Physical Component Score (SF-12 PCS) and Short Form-12 Mental Component Score (SF-12 MCS) in patients undergoing open decompression for lumbar canal stenosis has not been previously reported.

METHODS

Outcome assessment was prospectively evaluated using the ODI, RMDQ, SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS pre-intervention and at average follow-up of three months post-intervention. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the association between change in values of ODI, RMDQ, SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS. Distribution based methods (Effect size [ES], standardised response mean [SRM]) and anchor based method (Area under the curve [AUC] of receiver operating curve [ROC]) were used to determine responsiveness. AUC value ≥ 0.70 is considered as adequate level of responsiveness and the outcome instrument with the largest AUC is considered to be the most responsive outcome instrument.

RESULTS

This study included 77 participants. Responsiveness was assessed at a mean follow-up of 12 weeks postoperatively. There was significant strong correlation between ODI and RMDQ (r = 0.65, p < 0.0001). The ES of ODI, RMDQ, SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS were 1.54, 1.48, 1.85 and 0.51 respectively. The SRM of RMDQ, ODI, SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS were 1.22, 1.17, 1.0 and 0.47 respectively. AUC of ODI, RMDQ, SF-12 PCS and SF-12 MCS were 0.83-0.88, 0.82 to 0.86, 0.78 to 0.81 and 0.69 to 0.70 respectively.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended to use either ODI or RMDQ as region specific patient reported outcome instrument and SF-12 PCS as a health related quality of life outcome instrument to evaluate outcome after decompressive laminectomy for lumbar canal stenosis.

Health-related quality-of-life assessment in dementia: Evidence of cross-cultural validity in Latin America

All health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) measures for dementia have been developed in high-income countries and none were validated for cross-cultural use. Yet, the global majority of people living with dementia reside in low- and middle-income countries. We therefore investigated the measurement invariance of a set of self- and informant-report HRQL measures developed in the United Kingdom when used in Latin America. Self-reported HRQL was obtained using (DEMQOL) at a memory assessment service in the United Kingdom (n = 868) and a population cohort study in Latin America (n = 417). Informant reports were collected using DEMQOL-Proxy at both sites (n = 909 and n = 495). Multiple-group confirmatory bifactor models for ordered categorical item responses were estimated to evaluate measurement invariance. Results support configural, metric, and scalar invariance for the concept of general HRQL in DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy. The dominant impact of general HRQL on item responses was evident across U.K. English and Ibero American Spanish versions of DEMQOL (ωh = 0.87-0.90) and DEMQOL-Proxy (ωh = 0.88-0.89). Ratings of "positive emotion" did not show a major impact on general HRQL appraisal, particularly for Latin American respondents. Item information curves show that self- and informant-reports were highly informative about the presence rather than the absence of HRQL impairment. We found no major difference in conceptual meaning, sensitivity, and relevance of DEMQOL and DEMQOL-Proxy for older adults in the United Kingdom and Latin America. Further replication is needed for consensus over which HRQL measures are appropriate for making cross-national comparisons in global dementia research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).