German translation, cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the whiplash disability questionnaire

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Thierry Ettlin²  Michael McCaskey³  Corina Schuster¹ 

[1] Department of Engineering and Information Technology, Institute for Rehabilitation and Performance Technology, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland;Department of Behavioural Neurology, Medical Faculty, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland;Department of Health Sciences and Technology, Institute for Human Movement Sciences, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

关键词: Activities of daily living;    Pain;    Impairment;    Questionnaire;    Whiplash injury;   

Others  :  823868
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7525-11-45

 received in 2012-08-09, accepted in 2013-02-28,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

The Australian Whiplash Disability Questionnaire (WDQ) was cross-culturally translated, adapted, and tested for validity to be used in German-speaking patients. The self-administered questionnaire evaluates actual pain intensity, problems in personal care, role performance, sleep disturbances, tiredness, social and leisure activities, emotional and concentration impairments with 13 questions rated on an 11-point rating scale from zero to ten.

Methods

In a first part, the Australian-based WDQ was forward and backward translated. In a consensus conference with all translators and health care professionals, who were experts in the treatment of patients with a whiplash associated disorder (WAD), formulations were refined. Original authors were contacted for clarification and approval of the forward-backward translated version. The German version (WDQ-G) was evaluated for comprehensiveness and clarity in a pre-study patient survey by a random sample of German-speaking patients after WAD and four healthy twelve to thirteen year old teenagers.

In a second part, the WDQ-G was evaluated in a patient validation study including patients affected by a WAD. Inpatients had to complete the WDQ-G, the North American Spine Society questionnaire (NASS cervical pain), and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) at entry in the rehabilitation centre.

Results

In the pre-study patient survey (response rate 31%) patients rated clarity for title 9.6 ± 0.9, instruction 9.3 ± 1.4 and questions 9.6 ± 0.7, and comprehensiveness for title 9.6 ± 0.7, instruction 9.3 ± 1.4 and questions 9.8 ± 0.4. Time needed to fill in was 13.7 ± 9.0 minutes.

In total, 70 patients (47 females, age = 43.4 ± 12.5 years, time since injury: 1.5 ± 2.6 years) were included in the validation study. WDQ-G total score was 74.0 ± 21.3 points (range between 15 and 117 points). Time needed to fill in was 6.7 ± 3.4 minutes with data from 22 patients. Internal consistency was confirmed with Cronbachs’s α = 0.89. Concurrent validity showed a highly significant correlation with subscale pain and disability (NASS) at r = 0.74 and subscale pain (SF-36) at r = 0.71.

Conclusions

The officially translated and adapted WDQ-G can be used in German-speaking patients affected by a WAD to evaluate patients’ impairments in different domains. The WDQ-G is a self-administered outcome measure showing a high internal consistency and good concurrent validity.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Schuster et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Guzman J, Haldeman S, Carroll LJ, Carragee EJ, Hurwitz EL, Peloso P, Nordin M, Cassidy JD, Holm LW, Cote P: Clinical practice implications of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders: from concepts and findings to recommendations. Spine 2008, 33(4 Suppl):S199-213.
• [2]Spitzer WO, Skovron ML, Salmi LR, Cassidy JD, Duranceau J, Suissa S, Zeiss E: Scientific monograph of the Quebec Task Force on Whiplash-Associated Disorders: redefining “whiplash” and its management. Spine 1995, 20(8 Suppl):1S-73S.
• [3]Holm LW, Carroll LJ, Cassidy JD, Hogg-Johnson S, Cote P, Guzman J, Peloso P, Nordin M, Hurwitz E, van der Velde G: The burden and determinants of neck pain in whiplash-associated disorders after traffic collisions: results of the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Spine 2008, 33(4 Suppl):S52-59.
• [4]Guzman J, Hurwitz EL, Carroll LJ, Haldeman S, Cote P, Carragee EJ, Peloso PM, van der Velde G, Holm LW, Hogg-Johnson S: A new conceptual model of neck pain: linking onset, course, and care: the Bone and Joint Decade 2000–2010 Task Force on Neck Pain and Its Associated Disorders. Spine 2008, 33(4 Suppl):S14-23.
• [5]Hains F, Waalen J, Mior S: Psychometric properties of the neck disability index. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 1998, 21:75-80.
• [6]Leak AM, Cooper J, Dyer S, Williams KA, Turner-Stokes L, Frank AO: The Northwick Park Neck Pain Questionnaire, devised to measure neck pain and disability. Br J Rheumatol 1994, 33(5):469-474.
• [7]Hoving JL, O’Leary EF, Niere KR, Green S, Buchbinder R: Validity of the neck disability index, Northwick Park neck pain questionnaire, and problem elicitation technique for measuring disability associated with whiplash-associated disorders. Pain 2003, 102(3):273-281.
• [8]Pinfold M, Niere KR, O’Leary EF, Hoving JL, Green S, Buchbinder R: Validity and internal consistency of a whiplash-specific disability measure. Spine 2004, 29(3):263-268.
• [9]Schellingerhout JM, Heymans MW, Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, Koes BW, Terwee CB: Measurement properties of translated versions of neck-specific questionnaires: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2011, 11:87. BioMed Central Full Text
• [10]Schellingerhout JM, Verhagen AP, Heymans MW, Koes BW, de Vet HC, Terwee CB: Measurement properties of disease-specific questionnaires in patients with neck pain: a systematic review. Qual Life Res 2011, 21(4):659-670.
• [11]Bremerich FH, Grob D, Dvorak J, Mannion AF: The Neck Pain and Disability Scale: cross-cultural adaptation into German and evaluation of its psychometric properties in chronic neck pain and C1-2 fusion patients. Spine 2008, 33(9):1018-1027.
• [12]Scherer M, Blozik E, Himmel W, Laptinskaya D, Kochen MM, Herrmann-Lingen C: Psychometric properties of a German version of the neck pain and disability scale. Eur Spine J 2008, 17(7):922-929.
• [13]Pose B, Sangha O, Peters A, Wildner M: Validation of the German version of the North American Spine Society (NASS) cervical and lumbar spine outcome instrument. Zeitschrift fur Orthopadie und ihre Grenzgebiete 1999, 137(5):437-441.
• [14]Sangha O, Wildner M, Peters A: Evaluation of the North American Spine Society Instrument for assessment of health status in patients with chronic backache. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 2000, 138(5):447-451.
• [15]Angst F, Verra ML, Lehmann S, Gysi F, Benz T, Aeschlimann A: Responsiveness of the cervical Northern American Spine Society questionnaire (NASS) and the Short Form 36 (SF-36) in chronic whiplash. Clin Rehabil 2012, 26(2):142-151.
• [16]Stoll T, Huber E, Bachmann S, Baumeler HR, Mariacher S, Rutz M, Schneider W, Spring H, Aeschlimann A, Stucki G: Validity and sensitivity to change of the NASS questionnaire for patients with cervical spine disorders. Spine 2004, 29(24):2851-2855.
• [17]Ware JE Jr, Gandek B: Overview of the SF-36 Health Survey and the International Quality of Life Assessment (IQOLA) Project. J Clin Epidemiol 1998, 51(11):903-912.
• [18]Weigl M, Ewert T, Kleinschmidt J, Stucki G: Measuring the outcome of health resort programs. J Rheumatol 2006, 33(4):764-770.
• [19]Bullinger M: German translation and psychometric testing of the SF-36 Health Survey: preliminary results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. Soc Sci Med 1995, 41:1359-1366.
• [20]Bullinger M, Alonso J, Apolone G, Leplege A, Sullivan M, Wood-Dauphinee S, Gandek B, Wagner A, Aaronson N, Bech P: Translating health status questionnaires and evaluating their quality: the IQOLA Project approach. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 1998, 51(11):913-923.
• [21]Ware JE: SF-36® Health Survey Update. http://www.sf-36.org/tools/sf36.shtml webcite (access 28122012)
• [22]Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB: Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000, 25(24):3186-3191.
• [23]Frinking E, Kahan JP, van het Loo M, Vader J-P: Risk profiles and appropriate treatment therapies for whiplash associated disorders. Volume 19. Edited by Association SI. RAND Europe; 2003.
• [24]Stoll T, Gordon C, Seifert B, Richardson K, Malik J, Bacon PA, Isenberg DA: Consistency and validity of patient administered assessment of quality of life by the MOS SF-36; its association with disease activity and damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 1997, 24(8):1608-1614.
• [25]Bullinger M: German translation and psychometric testing of the SF-36 Health Survey: preliminary results from the IQOLA Project International Quality of Life Assessment. Soc Sci Med 1995, 41(10):1359-1366.
• [26]Ware JE Jr, Kosinski M, Gandek B, Aaronson NK, Apolone G, Bech P, Brazier J, Bullinger M, Kaasa S, Leplege A: The factor structure of the SF-36 Health Survey in 10 countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. J Clin Epidemiol 1998, 51(11):1159-1165.
• [27]Turk DC, Rudy TE, Salovey P: The McGill Pain Questionnaire reconsidered: confirming the factor structure and examining appropriate uses. Pain 1985, 21(4):385-397.
• [28]Kiss IC, Müller H, Abel M: The McGill pain questionnaire — German version. A study on cancer pain. Pain 1987, 29(2):195-207.
• [29]Daltroy LH, Cats-Baril WL, Katz JN, Fossel AH, Liang MH: The North American spine society lumbar spine outcome assessment Instrument: reliability and validity tests. Spine 1996, 21(6):741-749.
• [30]Niere K: The Whiplash Disability Questionnaire (WDQ). Aust J Physiother 2006, 52(2):151-151.
• [31]Finch E, Brooks D, Stratford P: Physical Rehabilitation Outcome Measures: A Guide to Enhanced Clinical Decision Making. 2nd edition. Hamilton, Ontario: Canadian Physiotherapy Association; 2002.
• [32]Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD: The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36) I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992, 30(6):473-483.
• [33]Stoll T, Gordon C, Seifert B, Richardson K, Malik J, Bacon PA, Isenberg DA: Consistency and validity of patient administered assessment of quality of life by the MOS SF-36; its association with disease activity and damage in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus. J Rheumatol 1997, 24:1608-1614.
• [34]Stucki G, Liang MH, Phillips C, Katz JN: The Short Form-36 is preferable to the SIP as a generic health status measure in patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty. Arthritis Care Res 1995, 8:174-181.
• [35]Angst F, Aeschlimann A, Steiner W, Stucki G: Responsiveness of the WOMAC osteoarthritis index as compared with the SF-36 in patients with osteoarthritis of the legs undergoing a comprehensive rehabilitation intervention. Ann Rheum Dis 2001, 60:834-840.
• [36]Drescher K, Hardy S, Maclean J, Schindler M, Scott K, Harris SR: Efficacy of postural and neck-stabilization exercises for persons with acute whiplash-associated disorders: a systematic review. Physiother Can 2008, 60(3):215-223.
• [37]Willis C, Niere KR, Hoving JL, Green S, O’Leary EF, Buchbinder R: Reproducibility and responsiveness of the Whiplash Disability Questionnaire. Pain 2004, 110(3):681-688.
• [38]Cote P, Cassidy JD, Carroll L, Frank JW, Bombardier C: A systematic review of the prognosis of acute whiplash and a new conceptual framework to synthesize the literature. Spine 2001, 26(19):E445-458.
• [39]McKenna SP, Doward LC, Meads D, Patrick D, Tennant A: Summary of Needs-Based Quality of Life Instruments. Value Health 2004, 7:S39-S40.
• [40]Hagell P, Hedin PJ, Meads DM, Nyberg L, McKenna SP: Effects of method of translation of patient-reported health outcome questionnaires: a randomized study of the translation of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Quality of Life (RAQoL) Instrument for Sweden. Value Health 2010, 13(4):424-430.
• [41]Stucki G, Meier D, Stucki S, Michel BA, Tyndall AG, Dick W, Theiler R: Evaluation of a German version of WOMAC (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities) Arthrosis Index. Z Rheumatol 1996, 55:40-49.
• [42]Offenbacher M, Ewert T, Sangha O, Stucki G: Validation of a German version of the ‘Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder and Hand’ questionnaire (DASH-G). Z Rheumatol 2003, 62:168-177.
• [43]Offenbaecher M, Waltz M, Schoeps P: Validation of a German version of the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ-G). J Rheumatol 2000, 27(8):1984-1988.
• [44]Hobart J, Cano S, Warner T, Thompson A: What sample sizes for reliability and validity studies in neurology? J Neurol 2012, 259(12):2681-2694.
• [45]Javali SB, Gudaganavar NV, Raj SM: Effect of varying sample size in estimation of reliability coefficients of internal consistency. WebmedCentral BIOSTATISTICS 2011, 2(2):WMC001572.
• [46]Munro BH: Statistical methods for health care research. 5th edition. Philadelphia, Penn.; London: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005.