89
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire. Part 3. Validity study and establishment of the measurement scale : Subcommittee on Low Back Pain and Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation of the Clinical Outcome Committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association, Japan

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The Japanese Orthopaedic Association decided to revise the JOA score for low back pain and to develop a new outcome measure. In February 2002, the first survey was performed with a preliminary questionnaire consisting of 60 evaluation items. Based on findings of that survey, 25 items were selected for a draft of the JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ). The second survey was performed to confirm the reliability of the draft questionnaire. This article further evaluates the validity of this questionnaire and establishes a measurement scale.

          Methods

          The subjects of this study consisted of 355 patients with low back disorders of any type (201 men, 154 women; mean age 50.7 years). Each patient was asked to fill in a self-administered questionnaire. Superficial validity was checked in terms of the completion rate for filling out the entire questionnaire. Factor analysis was then performed to evaluate the validity of the questionnaire and establish a measurement scale.

          Results

          As a result of the factor analysis, 25 items were categorized into five factors. The factors were named based on the commonality of the items: social function, mental health, lumbar function, walking ability, and low back pain. To establish a measurement scale for each factor, we determined the coefficient for each item so the difference between the maximum factor scores and minimum factor scores was approximately 100. We adjusted the formula so the maximum for each factor score was 100 and the minimum was 0.

          Conclusions

          We confirmed the validity of the JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire and est ablished a measurement scale.

          Related collections

          Most cited references7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          SF-36 health survey update.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Validation of the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire.

            The study was designed to validate a translated, culturally adapted questionnaire. We examined the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the Roland-Morris Questionnaire (RDQ) when assessing disability in Japanese patients with low back pain. The RDQ is a reliable, validated scale used to measure disability caused by low back pain. However, no validated Japanese version of this questionnaire is available. A series of 214 outpatients with low back pain participated in this validation study. The patients were given the RDQ and the SF-36, and assessed their pain and global rating of health. Among them, 57 who were clinically stable were given the RDQ again 2 weeks later. The reliability was examined based on the test-retest method and internal consistency. Sufficient reliability was demonstrated with a Chronbach's. coefficient of 0.85, and the reproducibility for the 30 patients was r = 0.91. The principal component analysis showed unidimensionality. The RDQ score of the 133 patients was significantly improved after treatment. The Japanese version of the RDQ is a useful scale that is easy to use with reliability, validity, and responsiveness when assessing patients with low back pain.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire. Part 2. Verification of its reliability

              Background The project to develop a new Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score rating system for low back disorders, the JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), is currently in progress. Part 1 of the study selected 25 “candidateȝ items for use on the JOABPEQ. The purpose of this current Part 2 of the study was to verify the reliability of the questionnaire. Methods A total of 161 patients with low-back disorders of any type participated in the study. Each patient was interviewed twice at an interval of 2 weeks using the same questionnaire. The reliability of the questionnaire was evaluated by determining the extension of the kappa and weighted kappa coefficients. Results Both kappa and weighted kappa were more than 0.50 for all but one item, which was 0.48. The lower 95% confidence interval exceeded 0.4 in all but two items, which was 0.39. This implied that the test–retest reliability of JOABPEQ was acceptable as a measure of outcome. Conclusions The tentative questionnaire of the JOABPEQ with 25 items was confirmed to be reliable enough to describe the quality of life of patients who suffer low back disorders.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Orthop Sci
                Journal of Orthopaedic Science
                Springer-Verlag (Tokyo )
                0949-2658
                1436-2023
                6 June 2008
                May 2008
                : 13
                : 3
                : 173-179
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Laboratory of Statistics, Osaka City University Faculty of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
                [2 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Keio University, Tokyo, Japan
                [3 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Wakayama Medical University, Wakayama, Japan
                [4 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Fukushima Medical University, Fukushima, Japan
                [5 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Nippon Medical School, 1-1-5 Sendagi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-8603 Japan
                [6 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
                [7 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Iwate Medical University School of Medicine, Morioka, Japan
                [8 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Saitama Medical School, Iruma-gun, Japan
                [9 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yamaguchi University School of Medicine, Yamaguchi, Japan
                [10 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan
                [11 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kochi Medical School, Kochi, Japan
                [12 ]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hoshigaoka Koseinenkin Hospital, Osaka, Japan
                [13 ]National Hospital Organization Osaka-Minami Medical Center, Kawachinagano, Japan
                [14 ]Department of Internal Medicine, Houai Hospital, Osaka, Japan
                [15 ]Department of Public Health, Osaka City University Faculty of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
                Article
                1213
                10.1007/s00776-008-1213-y
                2778667
                18528648
                5686408f-c1cb-47fe-bbe8-0da29e7448ce
                © The Japanese Orthopaedic Association 2008
                History
                : 25 September 2007
                : 10 January 2008
                Categories
                Original Article
                Custom metadata
                © The Japanese Orthopaedic Association 2008

                Orthopedics
                Orthopedics

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content147

                Cited by28

                Most referenced authors101