Validation of the Turkish Version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for Use in Low Back Pain

Küçükdeveci, Ayşe A; Tennant, Alan; Elhan, Atilla Halil; Niyazoglu, Hava

doi:10.1097/00007632-200112150-00024

Cited by 138 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The adaptation of the RMDQ for the Tunisian language has produced an instrument that is reliable and demonstrative of both internal and external validities. Reliability levels were similar to the French [4], German [22], Italian [15], Spanish [11] and Turkish [12] versions. Although statistically significant, the correlation in our study of the RMDQ score with the Schober test and the pain visual analogue scale is weak, compared with the original version [16] and the Italian version [15], for which correlation of the RMDQ score with the pain visual analogue scale was very good (r=0.79; P<0.001).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…Validation of the Tunisian version of the Roland-Morris questionnaire search, program evaluation, policy analysis, risk factors and use of health services [10,12].…”

Section: Ismail Bejia Mohamed Younes Ben Sallem Kamel Mondher Letaiefmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) [16] (Appendix) is the most common instrument used, and studies have reported that the test/re-test reliability, validity and responsiveness of RMDQ are adequate [16,18]. Furthermore, it has been successfully adapted across cultures [11,12,15,22]. The purpose of this study is to validate the culturally adapted, Tunisian-language version of the RMDQ.…”

Section: Ismail Bejia Mohamed Younes Ben Sallem Kamel Mondher Letaiefmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Validation of the Tunisian version of the Roland-Morris questionnaire

Béjia¹,

Younès²,

Kamel³

et al. 2004

Eur Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionLow back pain (LBP) is a ubiquitous health problem. It represents the most frequent illness in humans. LBP lifetime prevalence ranges 60-90%, and the annual incidence is 5% [6]. It is reported to be the leading cause of disability in people under 45 years of age and the third cause of disability in those over 45 [21]. High costs associated with LBP and its socio-economic impact have made this so-called self-limited and benign condition a considerable health-care policy challenge, especially in industrial countries [1,7,20,21]. LBP may have an impact on the functional status of the patient, interfering with basic activities like standing, walking, dressing and many work-related activities, leading to pain and disability. Measuring the disability is important. First, as an outcome measure, it is an important indicator of the of the patient's quality of life. In addition, this outcome can be used for planning and monitoring therapy, clinical and epidemiological reAbstract Our aim was to validate a culturally adapted, Tunisian-language version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), which is a reliable evaluation instrument for low-back-pain disability. A total of 62 patients with low back pain were assessed by the questionnaire. Reliability for the 1-week test/re-test was assessed by a construction of a Bland Altman plot. Internal construct validity was assessed by Cronbach's αtest. External construct validity was assessed by association with pain, the Schober test and the General Function Score. Sensitivity to change was determined using a t-test for paired data to compare RMDQ scores at inclusion and at completion of the therapeutic sequence of local corticosteroid injections. We also compared the questionnaire score with the General Function Score, both taken after completion of the therapeutic sequence. The constructed Bland Altman plot showed good reliability. Internal consistency of the RMDQ was found to be very good and the Cronbach's α test was 0.94, indicating a good internal construct validity. The questionnaire is correlated with the pain visual analogue scale (r=33; p=0.0001), with the Schober test (r=0.27; p=0.0001) and the General Function Score (r=56; p=0.0001) indicating an adequate external construct validity. The RMDQ administered after the therapeutic sequence is sensitive to change (r=0.83; p=0.000). Comparison of the questionnaire score to the General Function Score, after completion of the therapeutic sequence, was satisfactory (r=0.75; p=0.000). We conclude that the Tunisian version of the Roland-Morris questionnaire has good reliability and internal consistency. Furthermore, it has a good internal-and external construct validity and high sensitivity to change. It is an adequate and useful tool for assessing low-back-pain disability.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…Validation of the Tunisian version of the Roland-Morris questionnaire search, program evaluation, policy analysis, risk factors and use of health services [10,12].…”

Section: Ismail Bejia Mohamed Younes Ben Sallem Kamel Mondher Letaiefmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ismail Bejia Mohamed Younes Ben Sallem Kamel Mondher Letaiefmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validation of the Tunisian version of the Roland-Morris questionnaire

Béjia¹,

Younès²,

Kamel³

et al. 2004

Eur Spine J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A questionnaire, including the sociodemographic data, use of healthcare resources within the last 6 months, and ability to work within the last 3 months, the Roland Morris Disability Index (R&M) for evaluating functional status (16,17), and the Beck Depression Scale (BDS) for evaluating depression status (18) were used.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Burden of Chronic Low Back Pain in the Turkish Population

İçağasıoğlu¹,

Yumuşakhuylu²,

Ketenci³

et al. 2015

Turk J Phys Med Rehab

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a great economic burden to the society mainly in terms of the large number of the lost work days and disability, and it appears to be growing. The economic burden of LBP in Turkey is not known. This study aims to analyze the health care resource use, work and productivity loss, and health-related economics of CLBP in Turkey. Material and Methods:The study was designed as a multi-centered cross-sectional survey of patients in physical therapy and rehabilitation clinics from eight different regions of Turkey and 662 patients with CLBP over 18 years of age were included. Data on patient sociodemographics, disease-related healthcare resource use during the previous 6 months, inability to work during the last 3 months, Roland Morris Disability Index for the functional status, and psychological health with Beck Depression Scale were collected. Direct costs included medical visits, investigations, medications, hospitalizations, orthopedic aids, and physical therapy. İndirect costs were evaluated mostly with productivity loss. Results: The total annual direct costs for CLBP per patient were estimated at 1080 TL. The indirect costs were estimated at 5511 TL per patient. Direct cost was correlated with disease severity, duration, and age. Indirect cost was higher in women. Conclusion: The indirect costs for CLBP were significantly higher than the direct costs.

show abstract

“…[21][22][23][24][25][26] Our reasoning for including only head-to-head comparison studies was based on the observation of Messick who noted that properties such as reliability and validity are not properties of a measure, but rather of a measure in a particular context. 27 Accordingly, we felt that a meaningful comparison between measures could be obtained only when they were evaluated on the same patients, in the same setting, and at the same time points.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Head-to-Head Comparison Studies of the Roland-Morris and Oswestry Measures' Abilities to Assess Change

Newman¹,

Stratford

Letts³

et al. 2013

Physiotherapy Canada

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: To determine if the sensitivity to change of Roland-Morris Questionnaire (RMQ) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores differ when applied to patients with low back pain (LBP). A secondary purpose was to critique the methodological rigour of the identified head-to-head comparison studies. Methods: A systematic review of five online databases was performed to locate head-to-head comparison studies of the RMQ and the ODI that assessed the sensitivity to change of the two measures. Studies were eligible if they met a pre-determined set of inclusion criteria. A newly developed quality criteria form was used to evaluate the methodological rigour of head-to-head comparison studies. Results: Nine articles met the inclusion criteria. Although there was a statistically significant difference in favour of the RMQ for two studies, there was no apparent consistent advantage of one measure over the other. Frequent methodological deficiencies included no formal sample size calculation, no formal between-measure comparison, and no independent reference standard. Conclusion: There was no consistent evidence supporting one measure over the other. Many studies displayed methodological deficiencies.Key Words: self-report; sensitivity and specificity; systematic review; reproducibility of results. RÉ SUMÉObjectif : Dé terminer si la sensibilité au changement des ré sultats au questionnaire Roland-Morris (Roland-Morris Questionnaire, RMQ) et au questionnaire d'incapacité d'Oswestry (Oswestry Disability Index, ODI) diffè rent lorsqu'on les applique aux patients qui souffrent de lombalgie. Comme objectif secondaire, ré aliser une analyse critique de la rigueur mé thodologique des é tudes comparatives directes sé lectionné es. Mé thode : Une revue systé matique de cinq bases de donné es en ligne a é té ré alisé e pour rechercher des é tudes comparatives directes du RMQ et de l'ODI qui é valuaient la sensibilité au changement de ces deux mesures. Les é tudes é taient retenues si elles satisfaisaient à un ensemble de critè res d'inclusion pré é tabli. Un formulaire de critè res de qualité nouvellement é laboré a é té utilisé pour é valuer la rigueur mé thodologique des é tudes comparatives directes. Ré sultats : Neuf articles satisfaisaient aux critè res d'inclusion. Bien que pour deux é tudes, on ait constaté une diffé rence statistique appré ciable favorable au RQM, il n'y avait aucun avantage apparent commun pour une mesure plutô t que pour l'autre. Les lacunes mé thodologiques fré quentes é taient notamment l'absence de calcul formel de la taille de l'é chantillon, l'absence de critè re pour la comparaison des mesures et le fait qu'il n'y avait aucune norme de ré fé rence indé pendante. Conclusion : Il n'y a aucun é lé ment probant commun permettant de privilé gier une mesure plutô t qu'une autre. Plusieurs é tudes comportaient des lacunes sur le plan mé thodologique.The past three decades have seen a growing number of patient-reported outcome measures for persons with low back pain (LBP). 1-4 A challenge for clin...

show abstract

Validation of the Turkish Version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire for Use in Low Back Pain

Cited by 138 publications

References 21 publications

Validation of the Tunisian version of the Roland-Morris questionnaire

Validation of the Tunisian version of the Roland-Morris questionnaire

Burden of Chronic Low Back Pain in the Turkish Population

A Systematic Review of Head-to-Head Comparison Studies of the Roland-Morris and Oswestry Measures' Abilities to Assess Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About