Thai-version Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire: concurrent validity, test–retest reliability, internal consistency, and factors predictive for migraine-related disability

Abstract

BackgroundA Thai-version of the Migraine Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ 2.1) is available, but a qualified questionnaire used specifically for disability assessment was not available. The most relevant practical disability assessment tested during this study was the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire.ObjectivesTo test the concurrent validity, test–retest reliability, and internal consistency of a Thai-version MIDAS questionnaire, and factors to predict disability in people with migraine.MethodsWe conducted the present prospective study at a tertiary care teaching hospital in Bangkok. The original English MIDAS Questionnaire was translated into Thai with back-translation into English and the language equivalence was assessed. The Thai-version MIDAS Questionnaire was tested for concurrent validity, test–retest reliability, and internal consistency, and factors including duration of migraine history, migraine characteristics, and comorbidity were assessed for the ability to predict migraine-related disability of migraineurs.ResultsOf the 58 participants, 31 were eligible to be included. The validity of the Thai-version questionnaire between the MIDAS total score and the mean headache severity (question B), the mean pain duration per attack, and the mean pain numerical rating scale (NRS) score were moderately correlated with a Spearman correlation coefficient range 0.42–0.58. The test–retest reliability of MIDAS grade had a weighted κ of 0.66, and for individual questions of the MIDAS total score, questions A and B assessed by intraclass correlation coefficients ranged 0.89–0.98. The internal consistency had a Cronbach α of 0.98. The mean pain NRS score in the past 3 months was an independent predictive factor for migraine-related disability.ConclusionThe Thai-version MIDAS Questionnaire has moderate concurrent validity, acceptable internal consistency, and excellent test–retest reliability. It would be helpful to assess clinical outcomes. Future study with a standardized translation process for the Thai-version questionnaire and a larger sample size is warranted to confirm internal consistency and determine all probable predictive factors for migraine-related disability.

Preventive treatment response associated with migraine aura subtypes in a Thai population

“…The secondary outcome was a reduction from the baseline of MMDs/MHDs at month 3 for migraine patients with simple and complex aura. Other secondary outcomes were as follows: at least 30 and 50% reduction from baseline of MMDs/MHDs at month 3; a reduction from baseline of MMDs/MHDs at month 6, and at most recent follow-up; at least 30 and 50% reduction from baseline of MMDs/MHDs at month 6, and at most recent follow-up; quality of life score measured by using the Thai version of the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ) version 2.1 ( Asawavichienjinda et al, 2017 ) changed from baseline at months 3, 6, and at most recent follow-up; migraine disability score measured by using the Thai version of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire ( Asawavichienjinda et al, 2020 ) changed from baseline at months 3, 6, and at most recent follow-up for migraine patients with and without aura and with simple and complex aura. Additional secondary outcomes were subgroup analysis of patients with simple and complex aura and preventive treatment response with antiepileptic drugs, including topiramate or valproate and anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies, and a correlation between the complexity of aura and the success of preventive treatment.…”

Importance of quantifying migraine disability in the native language of the migraineur

“…Reliability and validity of the MIDAS questionnaire have been established and tested in various countries and languages. In this issue, Asawavichienjinda et al report testing of a Thai version of the MIDAS Questionnaire for validity, test–retest reliability, and internal consistency [ 8 ].…”