Greek Versions of the Oswestry and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaires

Abstract

Disability questionnaires are increasingly used for clinical assessment, outcome measurement of treatment and research methodology of low back pain. Their use in different countries and cultural groups must follow certain guidelines for translation and cross-cultural adaptation. The translation of such an instrument must be tested for its reliability and validity to be applied and to allow comparability of data. The Oswestry Disability Index and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire are two disability questionnaires most commonly used as outcome measures in patients with low back pain. The two questionnaires were translated for use with the Greek population, were back translated and tested, and became available in a final version. The Greek versions of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire were tested in 697 patients with low back pain. Internal consistency reliability for the Greek translation of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire reached a Cronbach's alpha coefficient of 0.833 and 0.885 respectively. Face validity and content validity were ensured. Concurrent validity was assessed using a six-point pain scale as a criterion. The correlation of both scales was significant. The Greek translation of these disability questionnaires provided reliable and valid instruments for the evaluation of Greek-speaking patients with low back pain.

Disability in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain: validation of the Slovene version of the Oswestry Disability Index

“…It has good sensitivity to change and is therefore a good tool for measuring outcomes of physical therapy in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain. The Slovene ODI demonstrated good reliability (internal consistency), which is in accordance with the results of the original study (12) and other investigations (20)(21)(22)(23)(24)(25).…”

“…A good correlation with VAS, EQ-5D and EQ-VAS in both interviews indicates good criterion-related validity (concurrent validity) of the Slovene ODI. A good correlation with VAS was reported also in other studies, with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.62 to 0.82 (17,24,26,27). We found no reports on the correlation between EQ-5D and ODI.…”

Development of a German version of the Oswestry Disability Index. Part 1: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity

“…For the whole scale the Cronbach's alpha was 0.90, which is higher than the majority of coefficients previously reported (0.76 [28]; 0.77 [20]; 0.83 [10]; 0.94 [23]). Cronbach's alphas greater than 0.8 are generally recommended for psychometric scales [36], although for individual patient assessments in the clinical situation, an alpha coefficient of at least 0.9 is recommended [7].…”

“…Convergent validity was examined by investigating the strength of the relationship between the ODI and various other indices of disability (RM score and Likert scale ratings) and LBP intensity. The ODI showed a somewhat higher correlation with the RM (r=0.80) than has been previously reported {r=0.66 (LBP patients with radicular pain), r=0.72 (low back sprain) [30]; r=0.73 [10]}. However, it was noticed that extrapolation of the regression equation for the relationship between ODI and RM, to a maximum RM score (24 points), yielded an ODI score of just 70 points.…”

Reliability and validity study on the Hungarian versions of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale

“…The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) [12,13] and the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QDS) [14,15] are two reliable, valid and widely used PROMs in spine care that have been validated for use with numerous languages since first being reported in English. Validation studies of the Spanish [16], French-Canadian [17], Danish [18], Chinese [19,20], German [21], Korean [22], Polish [23], Italian [24], Persian [25], Finnish [26], Turkish [27], Brazilian-Portuguese [28], Norwegian [29] and Greek [30] versions of the ODI have all been published. Nine validation studies on national versions of the QDS (Greek [31], Turkish [32], Polish [23], Persian [25], Portuguese [33], Korean [34], Dutch [35], French [36] and Arabic [37]) have been reported so far.…”