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: Arabic translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and psychometric properties of the low back pain knowledge questionnaire.
    Author: Kanaan S, Khraise H, Almhdawi KA, Natour J, Oteir AO, Mansour ZM.
    Journal: Physiother Theory Pract; 2022 Dec; 38(12):2202-2212. PubMed ID: 33752562.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Low Back Pain Knowledge Questionnaire (LBP_KQ) was originally developed and validated for English speakers but not yet available for Arabic speakers. PURPOSE: To translate, cross-culturally adapt, and test the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of the LBP_KQ. METHODS: Translation and cross-cultural adaptation were performed according to recommended guidelines. Construct validity was assessed through principal component analysis, and contrasted groups including physical therapists, nurses, and patients with low back pain. Concurrent validity was assessed by the correlation of LBP_KQ with the fear avoidance-belief questionnaire and depression, anxiety, and stress scale. Reliability was assessed using internal consistency (Cronbach's α) and test-retest reliability using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Bland-Altman analyses. Sensitivity to change was measured by comparing an educational intervention group (IG) and a control group (CG). RESULTS: The questionnaire has four components. Physical therapists had significantly (p < .001) higher LBP_KQ scores than nurses and patients indicating good construct validity. There was a significant correlation between LBP_KQ and fear avoidance-belief questionnaire total score (r = 0.200, p = .04), depression score (r = -0.219, p = .024), anxiety score (r = -0.251, p < .01), stress score (r = -0.199, p < .041). Cronbach's α was 0.662, and ICC (2,1) was 0.760 which reflects good reliability. There was a significant difference in LBP_KQ scores between IG and CG (p < .001) indicating sensitivity to change. CONCLUSION: The Arabic version of LBP_KQ is valid, reliable, and sensitive to change.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]