The Modified Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire

The Modified Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire Study design.Cross-sectional study.Objective.The goal of this study is to translate the English version of the Modified Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (MDQ) into a Dutch version and investigate its clinimetric properties for patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain (CLBP).Summary of Background Data.Fritz et al (2001) developed a modified version of the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODI) to assess functional status and named it the MDQ. In this version, a question regarding employment and homemaking ability was substituted for the question related to sex life. Good clinimetric properties for the MDQ were identified but up until now it is not clear whether the clinimetric properties of the MDQ would change if it was translated into a Dutch version.Methods.Translation of the MDQ into Dutch was done in 4 steps. Test-retest reliability was investigated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) model. Validity was calculated using Pearson correlations and a 2-way analysis of variance for repeated measures. Finally, responsiveness was calculated with the area under the curve (AUC), minimal detectable change (MDC), and the standardized response mean (SRM).Results.A total of 80 completed questionnaires were collected in 3 different hospitals and a total of 43 patients finished a 9 weeks intervention period, completing the retest. Test-retest reliability was excellent with an ICC of 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74–0.95). To confirm the convergent validity, the MDQ answered all predefined hypothesises (r = −0.65–0.69/P = 0.01–0.00) and good results for construct validity were found (P = 0.02). The MDQ had an AUC of 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47–0.81), an MDC of 8.80 points, and a SRM of 0.65.Conclusion.The Dutch version of the MDQ shows good clinimetric properties and is shown to be usable in the assessment of the functional status of Dutch-speaking patients with nonspecific CLBP.Level of Evidence: 3 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Spine Wolters Kluwer Health

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wolters_kluwer/the-modified-low-back-pain-disability-questionnaire-ra0KUwiukt
Publisher
Wolters Kluwer Health
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
ISSN
0362-2436
eISSN
1528-1159
D.O.I.
10.1097/BRS.0000000000002304
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Study design.Cross-sectional study.Objective.The goal of this study is to translate the English version of the Modified Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire (MDQ) into a Dutch version and investigate its clinimetric properties for patients with nonspecific chronic low back pain (CLBP).Summary of Background Data.Fritz et al (2001) developed a modified version of the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODI) to assess functional status and named it the MDQ. In this version, a question regarding employment and homemaking ability was substituted for the question related to sex life. Good clinimetric properties for the MDQ were identified but up until now it is not clear whether the clinimetric properties of the MDQ would change if it was translated into a Dutch version.Methods.Translation of the MDQ into Dutch was done in 4 steps. Test-retest reliability was investigated using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) model. Validity was calculated using Pearson correlations and a 2-way analysis of variance for repeated measures. Finally, responsiveness was calculated with the area under the curve (AUC), minimal detectable change (MDC), and the standardized response mean (SRM).Results.A total of 80 completed questionnaires were collected in 3 different hospitals and a total of 43 patients finished a 9 weeks intervention period, completing the retest. Test-retest reliability was excellent with an ICC of 0.89 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74–0.95). To confirm the convergent validity, the MDQ answered all predefined hypothesises (r = −0.65–0.69/P = 0.01–0.00) and good results for construct validity were found (P = 0.02). The MDQ had an AUC of 0.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.47–0.81), an MDC of 8.80 points, and a SRM of 0.65.Conclusion.The Dutch version of the MDQ shows good clinimetric properties and is shown to be usable in the assessment of the functional status of Dutch-speaking patients with nonspecific CLBP.Level of Evidence: 3

Journal

SpineWolters Kluwer Health

Published: Mar 1, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off