Development of the Italian version of the Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS-I): cross-cultural adaptation, factor analysis, reliability, validity and sensitivity to change

Monticone, Marco; Baiardi, Paola; Ferrari, Silvano; Foti, Calogero; Mugnai, Raffaele; Pillastrini, Paolo; Rocca, Barbara; Vanti, Carla

doi:10.1007/s11136-011-0007-4

Cited by 99 publications

(115 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The internal consistency for all subsections (rumination, helplessness and magnification) of the SA-PCS was also found to be excellent and considerably higher than previously reported ICC’s for subsections of the PCS. Nevertheless, the high internal consistency for the subsection magnification of the English, Afrikaans and Xhosa SA-PCS (α = 0.96; 0.99 and 0.93 respectively) found in this study is contradictory to the majority of validation studies which have previously reported that internal consistency for the magnification subsection, in particular, is usually unsatisfactory [7,34,37,38,40,41]. The internal consistency reported for the subsection magnification of the original, French, French-Canadian, Catalan, Italian and German PCS ranged between α = 0.56 to 0.67.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…These estimates are higher than the original English PCS (α = 0.87) as well as the Spanish PCS (α = 0.79), Dutch PCS (α = 0.85), French PCS (α = 0.85); Singalese PCS (α = 0.89), Catalan PCS (α = 0.89); Italian (α = 0.92), Chinese PCS (α = 0.93) and German PCS (α = 0.94) [7,34-42]. However, the evaluation of internal consistency of the entire PCS is theoretically incorrect since, by definition, Cronbach’s alpha “indicates the correlation among items that measure one single construct” [49].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sensitivity to change was estimated using the minimum detectable change (MDC) which was calculated by multiplying the SEM by the z-score associated with the 95% confidence interval and the square root of 2, which reflects the additional uncertainty introduced by using difference scores based on the measurements made at two time points (one month apart) [34]. The MDC is “the degree of change required in an individual’s score to ascertain if the change is real, over and above measurement error” [34]. …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This Afrikaans version of the PCS has however, to date not been validated among a South African fibromyalgia population. The following 11 translated versions available on the MAPI database have subsequently been cross-culturally adapted and validated among various healthy and chronic pain populations, including patients with fibromyalgia, namely; the Italian-, Croatian-, Singhalese-, Spanish-, German-, Catalan-, Chinese-, French-, French-Canadian-, and Dutch-PCS [14,34-42]. Since the Afrikaans version of the PCS available from the MAPI institute database has yet to be validated among a South African population, and no Xhosa version of the PCS currently exists; further adaptation and validation of the PCS is required to ensure cultural and linguistic applicability within a South African fibromyalgia population.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the South African Pain Catastrophizing Scale (SA-PCS) among patients with fibromyalgia

Morris

Grimmer

Louw

et al. 2012

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPain catastrophization has recently been recognized as a barrier to the healthy development of physical functioning among chronic pain patients. Levels of pain catastrophization in chronic pain patients are commonly measured using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS).ObjectiveTo cross-culturally adapt and validate the South African PCS (SA-PCS) among English-, Afrikaans- and Xhosa-speaking patients with fibromyalgia living in the Cape Metropole area, Western Cape, South Africa.MethodsThe original PCS was cross-culturally adapted in accordance with international standards to develop an English, Afrikaans and Xhosa version of the SA-PCS using a repeated measures study design. Psychometric testing included face/content validity, internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha-α), test-retest reliability (intraclass coefficient correlations-ICC), sensitivity-to-change and cross-sectional convergent validity (by comparing the adapted SA-PCS to related constructs).ResultsThe cross-culturally adapted English, Afrikaans and Xhosa SA-PCS showed good face and content validity, excellent internal consistency (with Chronbach’s α = 0.98, 0.98 and 0.97 for the English, Afrikaans and Xhosa SA-PCS, as a whole, respectively), excellent test-retest reliability (with ICC’s of 0.90, 0.91 and 0.89 for the English, Afrikaans and Xhosa SA-PCS, respectively); as well as satisfactory sensitivity-to-change (with a minimum detectable change of 8.8, 9.0 and 9.3 for the English, Afrikaans and Xhosa SA-PCS, respectively) and cross-sectional convergent validity (when compared to pain severity as well as South African versions of the Tampa scale for Kinesiophobia and the revised Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire).ConclusionThe SA-PCS can therefore be recommended as simple, efficient, valid and reliable tool which shows satisfactory sensitivity-to-change and cross-sectional convergent validity, for use among English, Afrikaans and Xhosa-speaking patients with fibromyalgia attending the public health sector in the Western Cape area of South Africa.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the South African Pain Catastrophizing Scale (SA-PCS) among patients with fibromyalgia

Morris

Grimmer

Louw

et al. 2012

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Catastrophizing was evaluated by means of the 13-item Italian version of the self-reported Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), ranging from 0 to 52, with higher scores representing greater catastrophizing [37].…”

Section: Outcome Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adults with idiopathic scoliosis improve disability after motor and cognitive rehabilitation: results of a randomised controlled trial

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

A systematic review of cross‐cultural validation of the pain catastrophizing scale

Ikemoto

Hayashi

Shiro

et al. 2020

European Journal of Pain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Although it has been suggested that the different cultural and social environments between countries contribute to variations in pain catastrophizing (PC), an international comparison of PC in patients with chronic pain has not yet been reported. Prior to undertaking this comparison, a cross-cultural assessment of the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) was undertaken to explore the different factor structures among each translated version of the PCS. Methods: The protocol for this systematic review was prospectively registered on International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews 2018 (CRD 42018086719). Electronic searches were conducted in the following databases: Ovid/Embase, Ovid/ MEDLINE and Ovid/PsycINFO, and then 19 articles (16 language versions) were included in this review. Based on the COSMIN check list, we investigated language translation followed by five domains of cross-cultural validation: structural validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability and hypotheses testing for construct validity in each study. Results: We found that (a) there were inconsistent structural models among each translated version, leading to variant subdomain structures for rumination, magnification and helplessness; (b) all languages versions showed sufficient internal consistency when assessing whole items and (c) the correlation coefficients between pain intensities and total scores of the PCS among each sample of chronic pain varied across the studies. Conclusions: These results indicate that the total score of the PCS could be compared across each translated version, however, caution is warranted when each subdomain of the PCS is compared between countries. Significance: Although the pain catastrophizing scale has been translated into approximately 20 languages, methodological quality during their translation process has not been systematically assessed. We found that all languages versions showed sufficient internal consistency when assessing whole items, however, there were inconsistent structural models among each translated version, leading to variant subdomain structures for rumination, magnification and helplessness. How to cite this article: Ikemoto T, Hayashi K, Shiro Y, et al. A systematic review of cross-cultural validation of the pain catastrophizing scale.

show abstract

Development of the Italian version of the Pain Catastrophising Scale (PCS-I): cross-cultural adaptation, factor analysis, reliability, validity and sensitivity to change

Abstract: The successfully translated Italian version of the PCS has good psychometric properties replicating those of other versions.

Cited by 99 publications

References 23 publications

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the South African Pain Catastrophizing Scale (SA-PCS) among patients with fibromyalgia

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the South African Pain Catastrophizing Scale (SA-PCS) among patients with fibromyalgia

Adults with idiopathic scoliosis improve disability after motor and cognitive rehabilitation: results of a randomised controlled trial

A systematic review of cross‐cultural validation of the pain catastrophizing scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About