Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Norwegian pain catastrophizing scale in patients with low back pain

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

Margreth Grotle¹  Ida Lochting¹  Kjersti Storheim²  Linda Fernandes¹ 

[1] National Resource Center for Rehabilitation in Rheumatology, Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway;University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

关键词: Translation;    Reliability;    Validity;    Pain catastrophizing;    Low back pain;   

Others  :  1149308
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2474-13-111

 received in 2011-11-16, accepted in 2012-06-22,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

Pain catastrophizing has been found to be an important predictor of disability and days lost from work in patients with low back pain. The most commonly used outcome measure to identify pain catastrophizing is the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). To enable the use of the PCS in clinical settings and research in Norwegian speaking patients, the PCS had to be translated. The purpose of this study was therefore to translate and cross-culturally adapt the PCS into Norwegian and to test internal consistency, construct validity and reproducibility of the PCS.

Methods

The PCS was translated before it was tested for psychometric properties. Patients with subacute or chronic non-specific low back pain aged 18 years or more were recruited from primary and secondary care. Validity of the PCS was assessed by evaluating data quality (missing, floor and ceiling effects), principal components analysis, internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha), and construct validity (Spearman’s rho). Reproducibility analyses included standard error of measurement, minimum detectable change, limits of agreement, and intraclass correlation coefficients.

Results

A total of 38 men and 52 women (n = 90), with a mean (SD) age of 47.6 (11.7) years, were included for baseline testing. A subgroup of 61 patients was included for test-retest assessments. The Norwegian PCS was easy-to-comprehend. The principal components analysis supported a three-factor structure, internal consistency was satisfactory for the PCS total score (α 0.90) and the subscales rumination (α 0.83) and helplessness (α 0.86), but not for the subscale magnification (α 0.53). In total, 86% of the correlation analyses were in accordance with predefined hypothesis. The reliability analyses showed intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.74 − 0.87 for the PCS total score and subscales. The PCS total score (range 0–52 points) showed a standard error of measurement of 4.6 points and a 95% minimum detectable change estimate of 12.8 points.

Conclusions

The Norwegian PCS total score showed acceptable psychometric properties in terms of comprehensibility, consistency, construct validity, and reproducibility when applied to patients with subacute or chronic LBP from different clinical settings. Our study support the use of the PCS total score for clinical or research purposes identifying or evaluating pain catastrophizing.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Fernandes et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Sullivan MJL, Bishop SR, Pivik J: The Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Development and validation. Psychol Assess 1995, 7:524-532.
• [2]Vlaeyen JWS, Kole-Snijders AMJ, Boeren RGB, van Eek H: Fear of movement/(re)injury in chronic low back pain and its relation to behavioral performance. Pain 1995, 62:363-372.
• [3]Wideman TH, Adams H, Sullivan MJL: A prospective sequential analysis of the fear-avoidance model of pain. Pain 2009, 145:45-51.
• [4]Martel MO, Thibault P, Sullivan MJL: The persistence of pain behaviors in patients with chronic back pain is independent of pain and psychological factors. Pain 2010, 151:330-336.
• [5]George SZ, Calley D, Valencia C, Beneciuk JM: Clinical Investigation of Pain-related Fear and Pain Catastrophizing for Patients With Low Back Pain. The Clinical Journal of Pain 2011, 27:108-115.
• [6]Keefe FJ, Lefebvre JC, Egert JR, Affleck G, Sullivan MJL, Caldwell DS: The relationship of gender to pain, pain behavior, and disability in osteoarthritis patients: the role of catastrophizing. Pain 2000, 87:325-334.
• [7]Main CJ, Watson PJ: Guarded movements: Development of chronicity. J Musculoskeletal Pain 1996, 4:163-170.
• [8]Thibault P, Loisel P, Durand MJ, Catchlove R, Sullivan MJL: Psychological predictors of pain expression and activity intolerance in chronic pain patients. Pain 2008, 139:47-54.
• [9]Ohlund C, Lindstrom I, Areskoug B, Eek C, Peterson LE, Nachemson A: Pain behavior in industrial subacute low back pain. part I. Reliability: concurrent and predictive validity of pain behavior assessments. Pain 1994, 58:201-209.
• [10]Prkachin KM, Schultz IZ, Hughes E: Pain Behavior and the Development of Pain-related Disability: The Importance of Guarding. The Clinical Journal of Pain 2007, 23:270-277.
• [11]Schultz IZ, Crook JM, Berkowitz J, Meloche GR, Milner R, Zuberbier OA, et al.: Biopsychosocial Multivariate Predictive Model of Occupational Low Back Disability. Spine 2002, 27:2720-2725.
• [12]Westman AE, Boersma K, Leppert J, Linton SJ: Fear-Avoidance Beliefs, Catastrophizing, and Distress: A Longitudinal Subgroup Analysis on Patients With Musculoskeletal Pain. Clinical Journal of Pain 2011, 27:567-577.
• [13]Brox JI, Storheim K, Grotle M, Tveito TH, Indahl A, Eriksen HR: Systematic review of back schools, brief education, and fear-avoidance training for chronic low back pain. Spine J 2008, 8:948-958.
• [14]Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D: Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 1993, 46:1417-1432.
• [15]Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB: Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures. Spine 2000, 25:3186-3191.
• [16]Waddell G: The back pain revolution. 2nd edition. Churchill Livingstone, United Kingdom, Edinburgh and London; 2004. ISBN: 978-0-443-07227-7
• [17]Roland M, Morris RJ: A study of the natural history of low-back pain. Part II: development of guidelines for trials of treatment in primary care. Spine 1983, 8:145-150.
• [18]Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJHM, Bombardier C, Croft P, Koes B, et al.: Outcome Measures for Low Back Pain Research: A Proposal for Standardized Use. Spine 1998, 23:2003-2013.
• [19]Mannion A, Elfering A, Staerkle R, Junge A, Grob D, Semmer N, et al.: Outcome assessment in low back pain: how low can you go? European Spine Journal 2005, 14:1014-1026.
• [20]Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I, Somerville D, Main CJ: A Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability. Pain 1993, 52:157-168.
• [21]Derogatis LR, Lipman RS, Rickels K, Uhlenhulth EH, Covi L: The Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL): a self-report symptom inventory. Behav Sci 1974, 19:1-15.
• [22]Hesbacher PT, Rickels K, Morris RJ, Newman H, Rosenfeld H: Psychiatric illness in family practice. J Clin Psychiatry 1980, 41:6-10.
• [23]EuroQol G: EuroQol - a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990, 16:199-208.
• [24]Strong J, Ashton R, Chant D: Pain intensity measurement in chronic low back pain. Clinical Journal of Pain 1991, 7:209-218.
• [25]Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, van der Windt DAWM, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al.: Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2007, 60:34-42.
• [26]Pallant J: SPSS Survival Manual. 3rd edition. A step by step Guide to Data Analysis using SPSS for Windows, Open University Press; 2007.
• [27]Andresen EM: Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2000, 81:S15-S20.
• [28]de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Bouter LM: When to use agreement versus reliability measures. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2006, 59:1033-1039.
• [29]Bland JM, Altman D: Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986, 327:307-310.
• [30]Osman A, Barrios FX, Kopper BA, Hauptmann W, Jones J, O’Neill E: Factor structure, reliability, and validity of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale. Journal of Behavioral Medicine 1997, 20:589-605.
• [31]Van Damme S, Crombez G, Bijttebier P, Goubert L, Van Houdenhove B: A confirmatory factor analysis of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale: invariant factor structure across clinical and non-clinical populations. Pain 2002, 96:319-324.
• [32]Meyer K, Sprott H, Mannion AF: Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the German version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale. J Psychosom Res 2008, 64:469-478.
• [33]Osman A, Barrios FX, Gutierrez PM, Kopper BA, Merrifield T, Grittmann L: The Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Further Psychometric Evaluation with Adult Samples. Journal of Behavioral Medicine 2000, 23:351-365.
• [34]Lame IE, Peters ML, Kessels AG, Van Kleef M, Patijn J: Test − retest stability of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale and the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia in Chronic Pain over a Longer Period of Time. J Heal Psychol 2008, 13:820-826.
• [35]George SZ, Valencia C, Beneciuk JM: A psychometric investigation of fear-avoidance model measures in patients with chronic low back pain. Jounal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy 2010, 40:197-205.
• [36]Pincus TP, Rusu AM, Santos RP: Responsiveness and Construct Validity of the Depression, Anxiety, and Positive Outlook Scale (DAPOS). Clinical Journal of Pain 2008, 24:431-437.