Validation of the Spanish version of the Index of Spouse Abuse

Background: Partner violence against women is a major public health problem. Although there are currently a number of validated screening and diagnostic tools that can be used to evaluate this type of violence, such tools are not available in Spain. The aim of this study is to analyze the validity and reliability of the Spanish version of the Index of Spouse Abuse (ISA). Methods: A cross-sectional study was carried out in 2005 in two health centers in Granada, Spain, in 390 women between 18 and 70 years old. Analyses of the factorial structure, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity were conducted. Cutoff points for each subscale were also defined. For the construct validity analysis, the SF-36 perceived general health dimension, the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale and the Goldberg 12-item General Health Questionnaire were included. Results: The psychometric analysis shows that the instrument has good internal consistency, reproducibility, and construct validity. Conclusions: The scale is useful for the analysis of partner violence against women in both a research setting and a healthcare setting

Validation of the spanish version of the multiple sclerosis international quality of life (musiqol) questionnaire

BACKGROUND: The Multiple Sclerosis International Quality Of Life (MusiQoL) questionnaire, a 31-item, multidimensional, self-administrated questionnaire that is available in 14 languages including Spanish, has been validated using a large international sample. We investigated the validity and reliability of the Spanish version of MusiQoL in Spain. METHODS: Consecutive patients with different types and severities of multiple sclerosis (MS) were recruited from 22 centres across Spain. All patients completed the MusiQoL questionnaire, the 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) health survey, and a symptoms checklist at baseline and 21 days later. External validity, internal consistency, reliability and reproducibility were tested. RESULTS: A total of 224 Spanish patients were evaluated. Dimensions of MusiQoL generally demonstrated a high internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha: 0.70-0.92 for all but two MusiQoL domain scores). External validity testing revealed that the MusiQoL index score correlated significantly with all SF-36 dimension scores (Pearson's correlation: 0.46-0.76), reproducibility was satisfactory (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.60-0.91), acceptability was high, and the time taken to complete the 31-item questionnaire was reasonable (mean [standard deviation]: 9.8 [11.8] minutes). CONCLUSIONS: The Spanish version of the MusiQoL questionnaire appears to be a valid and reliable instrument for measuring quality of life in patients with MS in Spain and constitutes a useful instrument to measure health-related quality of life in the clinical setting.

Psychometric characteristics of the Spanish version of instruments to measure neck pain disability

BACKGROUND. The NDI, COM and NPQ are evaluation instruments for disability due to NP. There was no Spanish version of NDI or COM for which psychometric characteristics were known. The objectives of this study were to translate and culturally adapt the Spanish version of the Neck Disability Index Questionnaire (NDI), and the Core Outcome Measure (COM), to validate its use in Spanish speaking patients with non-specific neck pain (NP), and to compare their psychometric characteristics with those of the Spanish version of the Northwick Pain Questionnaire (NPQ). METHODS. Translation/re-translation of the English versions of the NDI and the COM was done blindly and independently by a multidisciplinary team. The study was done in 9 primary care Centers and 12 specialty services from 9 regions in Spain, with 221 acute, subacute and chronic patients who visited their physician for NP: 54 in the pilot phase and 167 in the validation phase. Neck pain (VAS), referred pain (VAS), disability (NDI, COM and NPQ), catastrophizing (CSQ) and quality of life (SF-12) were measured on their first visit and 14 days later. Patients' self-assessment was used as the external criterion for pain and disability. In the pilot phase, patients' understanding of each item in the NDI and COM was assessed, and on day 1 test-retest reliability was estimated by giving a second NDI and COM in which the name of the questionnaires and the order of the items had been changed. RESULTS. Comprehensibility of NDI and COM were good. Minutes needed to fill out the questionnaires [median, (P25, P75)]: NDI. 4 (2.2, 10.0), COM: 2.1 (1.0, 4.9). Reliability: [ICC, (95%CI)]: NDI: 0.88 (0.80, 0.93). COM: 0.85 (0.75,0.91). Sensitivity to change: Effect size for patients having worsened, not changed and improved between days 1 and 15, according to the external criterion for disability: NDI: -0.24, 0.15, 0.66; NPQ: -0.14, 0.06, 0.67; COM: 0.05, 0.19, 0.92. Validity: Results of NDI, NPQ and COM were consistent with the external criterion for disability, whereas only those from NDI were consistent with the one for pain. Correlations with VAS, CSQ and SF-12 were similar for NDI and NPQ (absolute values between 0.36 and 0.50 on day 1, between 0.38 and 0.70 on day 15), and slightly lower for COM (between 0.36 and 0.48 on day 1, and between 0.33 and 0.61 on day 15). Correlation between NDI and NPQ: r = 0.84 on day 1, r = 0.91 on day 15. Correlation between COM and NPQ: r = 0.63 on day 1, r = 0.71 on day 15. CONCLUSION. Although most psychometric characteristics of NDI, NPQ and COM are similar, those from the latter one are worse and its use may lead to patients' evolution seeming more positive than it actually is. NDI seems to be the best instrument for measuring NP-related disability, since its results are the most consistent with patient's assessment of their own clinical status and evolution. It takes two more minutes to answer the NDI than to answer the COM, but it can be reliably filled out by the patient without assistance. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinical Trials Register NCT00349544.

Validity and reliability of the Spanish version of the DN4 (Douleur Neuropathique 4 questions) questionnaire for differential diagnosis of pain syndromes associated to a neuropathic or somatic component

BACKGROUND This study assesses the validity and reliability of the Spanish version of DN4 questionnaire as a tool for differential diagnosis of pain syndromes associated to a neuropathic (NP) or somatic component (non-neuropathic pain, NNP). METHODS A study was conducted consisting of two phases: cultural adaptation into the Spanish language by means of conceptual equivalence, including forward and backward translations in duplicate and cognitive debriefing, and testing of psychometric properties in patients with NP (peripheral, central and mixed) and NNP. The analysis of psychometric properties included reliability (internal consistency, inter-rater agreement and test-retest reliability) and validity (ROC curve analysis, agreement with the reference diagnosis and determination of sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values in different subsamples according to type of NP). RESULTS A sample of 164 subjects (99 women, 60.4%; age: 60.4 +/- 16.0 years), 94 (57.3%) with NP (36 with peripheral, 32 with central, and 26 with mixed pain) and 70 with NNP was enrolled. The questionnaire was reliable [Cronbach's alpha coefficient: 0.71, inter-rater agreement coefficient: 0.80 (0.71-0.89), and test-retest intra-class correlation coefficient: 0.95 (0.92-0.97)] and valid for a cut-off value > or = 4 points, which was the best value to discriminate between NP and NNP subjects. DISCUSSION This study, representing the first validation of the DN4 questionnaire into another language different than the original, not only supported its high discriminatory value for identification of neuropathic pain, but also provided supplemental psychometric validation (i.e. test-retest reliability, influence of educational level and pain intensity) and showed its validity in mixed pain syndromes.