Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Development of a Chinese version of the Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Oct 01; 33(21):2354-60.S

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-cultural adaptation and cross-sectional psychometric testing in a convenience sample of patients with low back pain.

OBJECTIVE

To translate and culturally adapt the Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1 (ODI 2.1) into a Mandarin Chinese version and to assess its reliability and validity.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The Chinese ODI 2.1 has not been developed and validated.

METHODS

The ODI 2.1 was translated and culturally adapted to the Chinese version. The validity of the translated Chinese version was assessed by examining the relationship between the ODI and other well-known measures. Test-retest reliability was examined in 52 of these patients, who completed a second questionnaire within 1 week.

RESULTS

Internal consistency of the ODI 2.1 was excellent with Cronbach's alpha = 0.903. The intraclass correlation coefficient of test-retest reliability was 0.89. The minimal detectable change was 12.8. The convergent validity of the Chinese ODI is supported by its high correlation with other physical functional status measures (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and SF-36 physical functioning subscale, r = 0.76 and -0.75, respectively), and moderate correlation with other measures (Visual Analogue Scale, r = 0.68) and certain SF-36 subscales (role-physical, bodily pain, and social functioning, r range: -0.49 to -0.57). As expected, the ODI was least correlated with nonfunctional measures (SF-36 mental subscale and role-emotional subscale, r = -0.25 and -0.33, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study indicate that the Chinese version of the ODI 2.1 is a reliable and valid instrument for the measurement of functional status in patients with low back pain.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Faculty of Physical Therapy, College of Health Science, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Study

Language

eng

PubMed ID

18827702

Citation

Lue, Yi-Jing, et al. "Development of a Chinese Version of the Oswestry Disability Index Version 2.1." Spine, vol. 33, no. 21, 2008, pp. 2354-60.
Lue YJ, Hsieh CL, Huang MH, et al. Development of a Chinese version of the Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33(21):2354-60.
Lue, Y. J., Hsieh, C. L., Huang, M. H., Lin, G. T., & Lu, Y. M. (2008). Development of a Chinese version of the Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1. Spine, 33(21), 2354-60. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818018d8
Lue YJ, et al. Development of a Chinese Version of the Oswestry Disability Index Version 2.1. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Oct 1;33(21):2354-60. PubMed PMID: 18827702.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Development of a Chinese version of the Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1. AU - Lue,Yi-Jing, AU - Hsieh,Ching-Lin, AU - Huang,Mao-Hsiung, AU - Lin,Gau-Tyan, AU - Lu,Yen-Mou, PY - 2008/10/2/pubmed PY - 2009/5/20/medline PY - 2008/10/2/entrez SP - 2354 EP - 60 JF - Spine JO - Spine (Phila Pa 1976) VL - 33 IS - 21 N2 - STUDY DESIGN: Cross-cultural adaptation and cross-sectional psychometric testing in a convenience sample of patients with low back pain. OBJECTIVE: To translate and culturally adapt the Oswestry Disability Index version 2.1 (ODI 2.1) into a Mandarin Chinese version and to assess its reliability and validity. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The Chinese ODI 2.1 has not been developed and validated. METHODS: The ODI 2.1 was translated and culturally adapted to the Chinese version. The validity of the translated Chinese version was assessed by examining the relationship between the ODI and other well-known measures. Test-retest reliability was examined in 52 of these patients, who completed a second questionnaire within 1 week. RESULTS: Internal consistency of the ODI 2.1 was excellent with Cronbach's alpha = 0.903. The intraclass correlation coefficient of test-retest reliability was 0.89. The minimal detectable change was 12.8. The convergent validity of the Chinese ODI is supported by its high correlation with other physical functional status measures (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire and SF-36 physical functioning subscale, r = 0.76 and -0.75, respectively), and moderate correlation with other measures (Visual Analogue Scale, r = 0.68) and certain SF-36 subscales (role-physical, bodily pain, and social functioning, r range: -0.49 to -0.57). As expected, the ODI was least correlated with nonfunctional measures (SF-36 mental subscale and role-emotional subscale, r = -0.25 and -0.33, respectively). CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that the Chinese version of the ODI 2.1 is a reliable and valid instrument for the measurement of functional status in patients with low back pain. SN - 1528-1159 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/18827702/Development_of_a_Chinese_version_of_the_Oswestry_Disability_Index_version_2_1_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31818018d8 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -