Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, internal consistency and validation of the Spinal Function Sort (SFS) for French- and German-speaking patients with back complaints.

TitreCross-cultural adaptation, reliability, internal consistency and validation of the Spinal Function Sort (SFS) for French- and German-speaking patients with back complaints.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2012
AuthorsBorloz, S, Trippolini, MA, Ballabeni, P, Luthi, F, Deriaz, O
JournalJ Occup Rehabil
Volume22
Issue3
Pagination387-93
Date Published2012 Sep
DOI10.1007/s10926-012-9356-2
ISSN1573-3688
Mots-clésAdult, Aged, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Disability Evaluation, European Continental Ancestry Group, Female, France, Germany, Humans, Low Back Pain, Male, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Psychometrics, Questionnaires, Reproducibility of Results, Self Report, Sensitivity and Specificity, Translations, Young Adult
Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Functional subjective evaluation through questionnaire is fundamental, but not often realized in patients with back complaints, lacking validated tools. The Spinal Function Sort (SFS) was only validated in English. We aimed to translate, adapt and validate the French (SFS-F) and German (SFS-G) versions of the SFS.

METHODS: Three hundred and forty-four patients, experiencing various back complaints, were recruited in a French (n = 87) and a German-speaking (n = 257) center. Construct validity was estimated via correlations with SF-36 physical and mental scales, pain intensity and hospital anxiety and depression scales (HADS). Scale homogeneities were assessed by Cronbach's α. Test-retest reliability was assessed on 65 additional patients using intraclass correlation (IC).

RESULTS: For the French and German translations, respectively, α were 0.98 and 0.98; IC 0.98 (95% CI: [0.97; 1.00]) and 0.94 (0.90; 0.98). Correlations with physical functioning were 0.63 (0.48; 0.74) and 0.67 (0.59; 0.73); with physical summary 0.60 (0.44; 0.72) and 0.52 (0.43; 0.61); with pain -0.33 (-0.51; -0.13) and -0.51 (-0.60; -0.42); with mental health -0.08 (-0.29; 0.14) and 0.25 (0.13; 0.36); with mental summary 0.01 (-0.21; 0.23) and 0.28 (0.16; 0.39); with depression -0.26 (-0.45; -0.05) and -0.42 (-0.52; -0.32); with anxiety -0.17 (-0.37; -0.04) and -0.45 (-0.54; -0.35).

CONCLUSIONS: Reliability was excellent for both languages. Convergent validity was good with SF-36 physical scales, moderate with VAS pain. Divergent validity was low with SF-36 mental scales in both translated versions and with HADS for the SFS-F (moderate in SFS-G). Both versions seem to be valid and reliable for evaluating perceived functional capacity in patients with back complaints.

Alternate URL

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22411541?dopt=Abstract

Alternate JournalJ Occup Rehabil
Citation Key / SERVAL ID3201
PubMed ID22411541

                         

IUMSP | www.iumsp.ch
Institut universitaire de médecine sociale et préventive
Route de la Corniche 10, 1010 Lausanne - Switzerland
+41 21 314 72 72 | dess.info@unisante.ch

Go to top