These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Simplified Chinese Version of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire: Cross-cultural Adaptation, Reliability, and Validity for Patients With Low Back Pain.
    Author: Yao M, Li ZJ, Zhu S, Wang JY, Pan YF, Tian ZR, Shen LY, Cheng SD, Wang YJ, Cui XJ.
    Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2018 Mar 15; 43(6):E357-E364. PubMed ID: 28953707.
    Abstract:
    STUDY DESIGN: Cross-cultural adaptation and cross-sectional psychometric testing in a convenience sample of patients with low back pain. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to translate and adapt the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ) into a simplified Chinese version, and assess its reliability and validity. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: No simplified Chinese version of the JOABPEQ was previously available. METHODS: We translated and culturally adapted the original English JOABPEQ to develop a Chinese version, based on cross-cultural adaptation guidelines. Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was used to confirm the factor structure of each subscale. Internal consistency was evaluated with Cronbach alpha. Test-retest reliability was examined in stable patients, who completed the questionnaire again at 4 days to 2 weeks from baseline. The validity of the translated Chinese version was assessed by examining the relationship between the JOABPEQ and Chinese versions of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), and the Numerical Pain Rating Scale. Ceiling and floor effects were considered present if more than 15% of respondents achieved the lowest or highest possible total score. RESULTS: The JOABPEQ showed excellent internal consistency (α = 0.886). The test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients) ranged from 0.951 to 0.977. The convergent validity of the Chinese version was supported by its high correlation with other physical functional status measures (RMDQ, ODI, and SF-36 Physical Function; r values from -0.645 to -0.726), and moderate correlation with other measures (SF-36 Bodily pain and Social functioning subscales; r values 0.426-0.546). Q5 Mental health was highly correlated with SF-36 items (r values 0.337-0.640). There was a floor effect in Q1 low back pain (38, 20.65%). CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the simplified Chinese version of the JOABPEQ is a reliable and valid instrument to measure the multidimensional status in patients with low back pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]