Psychometric properties of the Brazilian version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale for acute low back pain

Abstract

Measurement instruments of pain catastrophizing for middle-aged and elderly individuals are needed to understand its impact on low back pain. The goals were to cross-culturally adapt the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, assess the construct validity through Rasch analysis, and verify reliability and convergent validity of pain catastrophizing with psychosocial factors. 131 individuals aged 55 years and older with acute low back pain were interviewed . The intra-rater reliability was Kp = 0.80 and interrater Kp = 0.75. The Rasch analysis found adequate reliability coefficients (0.95 for items and 0.90 for individuals ). The separation index for the elderly was 2.95 and 4.59 items. Of the 13 items, one did not fit the model, which was justified in the sample evaluated. The pain catastrophizing correlated with most psychosocial factors. The instrument proved to be clinically useful. Subsequent studies should carry out the same analysis in different populations.

Development of the Hausa Version of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale: Translation, Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Evaluation in Mixed Urban and Rural Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain

“…The PCS-Hausa appears to be acceptable as all the respondents completed the questionnaire without missing values. Although no ceiling or oor effects were observed in the total score or subscales similar to reports of previous studies [43,78], however, ceiling effects were seen in 8 out of the 13 items whereas oor effects were seen in only 3 items. In line with our ndings, ceiling effects in more than half of the PCS items were also reported in the Norwegian validation [43].…”

“…The moderate correlation obtained with the FABQ-physical activity (rho = 0.32) and FABQwork (rho = 0.36) subscales were smaller compared to that obtained for the German (FABQ-physical activity; rho = 0.51 and FABQ-work; rho = 0.61) and Turkish (FABQ-physical activity; rho = 0.49 and FABQwork; rho = 0.47) [48] versions but comparable to the Norwegian version [43] (FABQ-physical activity; rho = 0.34 and FABQ-work; rho = 0.25) except for the FABQ-work subscale which was found to be very low in the later version. Similarly, the moderate correlation obtained between our questionnaire and the ODI (rho = 0.35) coincides with the 0.35 obtained in the Hindi version [76] but slightly lower than the range of 0.40-0.57 obtained by other versions using the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire [39,40,78]. This variation in correlations values across studies could be explained for the different questionnaires used in the assessment of functional disability.…”

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Turkish version of the pain catastrophizing scale among patients with ankylosing spondylitis

“…The results of this study indicate that the PCS-Turk is a valid and reliable tool for Turkish patients with ankylosing spondilitis. The process of translating and back-translating the English PCS was performed in strict accordance with established guidelines 23 ) . The sample size was calculated by using the ratio of five individuals for each item to be included in the factor analysis 32 ) and 64 patients were recruited for the study.…”

“…Sullivan et al developed the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) to screen patients with catastrophizing thoughts and improve treatment planning, implementation, and outcome assessment; it has also been widely used to research pain and chronic pain 15 ) . Validated versions of the PCS have been published in numerous languages; however, none have included patients with ankylosing spondylitis 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ) . Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe the cultural adaptation, validation, and reliability of the Turkish version of the PCS (PCS-Turk) in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.…”

Determinants for Meaningful Clinical Improvement of Pain and Health-Related Quality of Life After Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Intractable Pain

“…Sex, age, scholar degree, type of work, smoking status, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, opioid use, body mass index (BMI), pain duration, pain localization, and pain diagnosis were recorded according to International Association for the Study of Pain standards. Pain catastrophizing was measured using the Brazilian version of the pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) . Preoperative anxiety and depression were evaluated using the beck anxiety inventory (BAI) and beck depression inventory (BDI), respectively .…”