J Korean Med Sci.  2006 Dec;21(6):1092-1097. 10.3346/jkms.2006.21.6.1092.

Validation in the Cross-Cultural Adaptation of the Korean Version of the Oswestry Disability Index

• Jeon CH
• Kim DJ
• Kim SK
• Kim DJ
• Lee HM
• Park HJ

• KMID: 1713125
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2006.21.6.1092

Abstract

Disability questionnaires are used for clinical assessment, outcome measurement, and research methodology. Any disability measurement must be adapted culturally for comparability of data, when the patients, who are measured, use different languages. This study aimed to conduct cross-cultural adaptation in translating the original (English) version of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) into Korean, and then to assess the reliability of the Korean versions of the Oswestry Disability Index (KODI). We used methodology to obtain semantic, idiomatic, experimental, and conceptual equivalences for the process of cross-cultural adaptation. The KODI were tested in 116 patients with chronic low back pain. The internal consistency and reliability for the KODI reached 0.9168 (Cronbach's alpha). The test-retest reliability was assessed with 32 patients (who were not included in the assessment of Cronbach's alpha) over a time interval of 4 days. Test-retest correlation reliability was 0.9332. The entire process and the results of this study were reported to the developer (Dr. Fairbank JC), who appraised the KODI. There is little evidence of differential item functioning in KODI. The results suggest that the KODI is internally consistent and reliable. Therefore, the KODI can be recommended as a low back pain assessment tool in Korea.

Keyword

Korean Version; Back Pain; Oswestry Disability Index; Disability Evaluation

MeSH Terms

Sensitivity and Specificity
Risk Factors
Risk Assessment/methods
Reproducibility of Results
*Questionnaires
Pain Measurement/*methods
Middle Aged
Male
Low Back Pain/classification/*diagnosis/*epidemiology/psychology
Korea/epidemiology
Humans
Female
*Disability Evaluation
*Cross-Cultural Comparison
Aged
Adult
*Activities of Daily Living

Reference

1. Amadio PC. Outcomes measurements. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993. 75:1583–1584.

2. Tonali P, Padua L, Sanguinetti C, Padua R, Romanini E, Amadio P. Outcome research and patient-oriented measures in the multiperspective assessment of neurological and musculoskeletal disorders. Consensus Conference: Third Roman Neurophysiology Day, Outcome Research in Neurolgy and in Musculoskeletal Disorders-24 October 1998. Ital J Neurol Sci. 1999. 20:139–140.

3. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine. 2000. 25:2940–2952.

4. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000. 25:3186–3191.

5. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measure: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993. 46:1417–1432.

6. Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Koke AJ, van der Heijden GJ, Knipschild PG. Measuring the functional status of patients with low back pain. Assessment of the quality of four disease-specific questionnaires. Spine. 1995. 20:1017–1028.

7. Wang JM, Kim DJ. Assessment of the spinal pain using visual analogue scale (VAS). J Korean Soc Spine Surg. 1995. 4:36–42.

8. Campos SS, Johnson TM. Spilker B, editor. Cultural consideration. Quality of life Assessments in Clinical Trials. 1990. New York, NY: Raven Press;163–170.

9. Guyatt GH, Berman LB, Townsend M, Taylor DW. Should study subjects see their previous responses? J Chronic Dis. 1985. 38:1003–1007.

10. Herdman M, Fox-Rushby J, Badia X. A model of equivalence in the cultural adaptation of HRQoL instruments: the universalist approach. Qual Life Res. 1988. 7:323–335.

11. Roland M, Morris R. A study of the natural history of low-back pain. Part II: development of guidelines for trials of treatment in primary care. Spine. 1983. 8:145–150.

12. Cronbach L. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of the test. Psychometrika. 1951. 16:297–334.

13. Cortina JM. What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. J Appl Psychol. 1993. 78:98–104.

14. Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory. 1994. New York. NY: McGraw-Hill.

15. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O'Brien JP. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy. 1980. 66:271–273.

16. Roland M, Morris R. A study of the natural history of back pain. Part I: development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine. 1983. 8:141–144.

17. Kopec JA, Esdaile JM, Abrahamowicz M, Abenhaim L, Wood-Dauphinee S, Lamping DL, Williams JI. The Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale: conceptualization and development. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996. 49:151–161.

18. Gronblad M, Hupli M, Wennerstrand P, Jarvinen E, Lukinmaa A, Kouri JP, Karaharju EO. Intercorrelation and test-retest reliability of the Pain Disability Index (PDI) and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ) and their correlation with pain intensity in low back pain patients. Clin J Pain. 1993. 9:189–195.