Hong Kong Physiotherapy Journal
Volume 22, Issue 1 , Pages 40-49, 2004

Measurement Properties of the Hong Kong Chinese Version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire

  • Raymond C.C. Tsang, MSc(Physiotherapy)

      Affiliations

    • On behalf of the Working Group on Low Back Pain Outcomes Assessment, Coordinating Committee in Physiotherapy, Hospital Authority, Hong Kong SAR, China.
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests and correspondence to: Raymond Tsang, Physiotherapy Department, Queen Mary Hospital, 102 Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong SAR, China

Received 5 August 2003; accepted 25 October 2004.

Article Outline

Abstract 

There is a paucity of locally developed functional status measures to assess the disability of patients with low back pain. This study sought to adapt a well-known disability measure with good psychometric properties for local use. A Hong Kong Chinese version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ-HK) was produced by forward and backward translations of the original questionnaire. The reliability, validity and responsiveness of the RMDQ-HK were examined in 112 patients with low back pain attending 11 physiotherapy outpatient departments of the Hong Kong Hospital Authority. Item analysis showed that all except one item had satisfactory discriminative ability. The test-retest reliability of the RMDQ-HK was 0.94 (intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC[1,1]; 95% confidence interval, CI, 0.90-0.97). Its internal consistency was 0.86 (Kuder-Richardson 20 coefficient; 95% CI, 0.82-0.89). A change of 4 RMDQ-HK points with 95% CI indicated a true change rather than random variation. The standardized response mean of the RMDQ-HK was 1.22. Using a criterion of at least 70% improvement in overall condition for clinically important change from treatment commencement to discharge, change scores of 3, 6 and 9 RMDQ-HK points were considered clinically important for patients initially with mild (RMDQ-HK, 0-8), moderate (RMDQ-HK, 9-16) and high (RMDQ-HK, 17-24) severity, respectively. However, there was little correlation between mean change in RMDQ-HK score and global rating of change in overall condition at discharge (rs = −0.22, p = 0.02). Greater correlation was obtained between the mean change score of pain rating and the global rating of change (rs = −0.44, p < 0.001). Patients might have based the rating of their change in overall condition at discharge more on change in pain intensity than on change in functional disability. Overall, the test-retest reliability, internal consistency and responsiveness of the RMDQ-HK were high. Further investigations of the content validity and construct validity of the RMDQ-HK are recommended.

Key words:  functional status measure , Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire , low back pain

No full text is available. To read the body of this article, please view the PDF online.

 

Back to Article Outline

References 

  1. Deyo RA . Measuring the functional status of patients with low back pain . Arch Phys Med Rehabil . 1988;69:1044–1053
  2. Deyo RA , Andersson G , Bombardier C , et al.   Outcome measures for studying patients with low back pain . Spine . 1994;19(Suppl 18S):2032S–2036S
  3. Beurskens AJHM , de Vet HCW , Koke AJA . Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments . Pain . 1996;65:71–76
  4. Co YY , Eaton S , Maxwell MW . The relationship between the St Thomas and Oswestry Disability scores and the severity of low back pain . J Manipulative Physiol Ther . 1993;16:14–18
  5. Deyo RA , Centor RM . Assessing the responsiveness of functional scales to clinical change: an analogy to diagnostic test performance . J Chronic Dis . 1986;39:897–906
  6. Riddle DL , Stratford PW , Binkley JM . Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: Part 2 . Phys Ther . 1998;78:1197–1207
  7. 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
  8. Stratford PW , Binkley J , Solomon P , et al.   Assessing change over time in patients with low back pain . Phys Ther . 1994;74:528–533
  9. Stratford PW , Binkley J , Solomon P , et al.   Defining the minimum level of detectable change for the Roland-Morris Questionnaire . Phys Ther . 1996;76:359–365
  10. Stratford PW , Finch E , Solomon P , et al.   Using the Roland-Morris Questionnaire to make decisions about individual patients . Physiother Can . 1996;48:107–110
  11. Stratford PW , Binkley JM , Riddle DL , et al.   Sensitivity to change of the Roland-Morris Back Pain Questionnaire: Part 1 . Phys Ther . 1998;78:1186–1196
  12. Stratford PW , Binkley JM . Measurement properties of the RM-18. A modified version of the Roland-Morris Disability Scale . Spine . 1997;22:2416–2421
  13. Bergner M , Bobbitt RA , Carter WB , et al.   The Sickness Impact Profile: development and final revision of a health status measure . Med Care . 1981;19:787–805
  14. In:  Cole B ,  Finch E ,  Gowland C , et al. editor. Physical Rehabilitation Outcome Measures . Toronto, Canada: Canadian Physiotherapy Association; 1994;
  15. Jensen MP , Karoly P , Braver S . The measurement of clinical pain intensity: a comparison of six methods . Pain . 1986;27:117–126
  16. Crocker L , Algina J . Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory . Orlando, FL: Holt, Rinehart & Winston; 1986;
  17. Streiner DL , Norman GR . Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use . 2nd edition.. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1995;
  18. Fleiss JL . The Design and Analysis of Clinical Experiments . New York: John Wiley & Son; 1986;
  19. Jacobson NS , Follette WC , Revenstorf D . Psychotherapy outcome research: methods for reporting variability and evaluating clinical significance . Behav Ther . 1984;15:336–352
  20. Ottenbacher KJ , Johnson MB , Hojem M . The significance of clinical change and clinical change of significance: issues and methods . Am J Occup Ther . 1988;42:156–163
  21. Christensen L , Mendoza JL . A method of assessing change in a single subject: an alteration of the RC index . Behav Ther . 1986;17:305–308
  22. Liang MH , Fossel AH , Larson MG . Comparisons of five health status instruments for orthopedic evaluation . Med Care . 1990;28:632–642
  23. Bullinger M , Anderson R , Cella D , et al.   Developing and evaluating cross-cultural instruments from minimum requirements to optimal models . Qual Life Res . 1993;2:451–459
  24. Guillemin F , Bombardier C , Beaton D . Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines . J Clin Epidemiol . 1993;46:1417–1432
  25. Guyatt GH . The philosophy of health-related quality of life translation . Qual Life Res . 1993;2:461–465
  26. Herdman M , Fox-Rushby J , Badia X . A model of equivalence in the cultural adaptation of HRQoL instruments: the uni-versalist approach . Qual Life Res . 1998;7:323–335
  27. Mathias SD , Fifer SK , Patrick DL . Rapid translation of quality of life measures for international clinical trials: avoiding errors in the minimalist approach . Qual Life Res . 1994;3:403–412
  28. Sartorius N , Kuyken W . Translation of health status instrument . In:  Orley J ,  Kuyken W editor. Quality of Life Assessment: International Perspectives . Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1994;p. 3–18
  29. Ware JE , Keller SD , Gandek B , et al.   Evaluating translations of health status questionnaires: methods from the IQOLA Project . Int J Technol Assess Health Care . 1995;11:525–551
  30. Kopec JA , Esdaile JM , Abrahamowicz M , et al.   The Quebec back pain disability scale: measurement properties . Spine . 1995;20:341–352
  31. Landis JR , Koch GG . The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data . Biometrics . 1977;33:159–174
  32. Nunnally J , Bernstein IH . Psychometric Theory . 3rd edition. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994;
  33. Fitzpatrick R , Davey C , Buxton MJ , et al.   Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials . Health Tech-nol Assess . 1998;2(14):1–74
  34. Beattie P , Maher C . The role of functional status question- naires for low back pain . Aust J Physiother . 1997;43:29–38
  35. Beurskens AJ , de Vet HC , Koke AJ , et al.   Measuring the functional status of patients with low back pain: assessment of the quality of four disease-specific questionnaires . Spine . 1995;20:1017–1028
  36. Kopec JA , Esdaile JM . Functional disability scales for back pain . Spine . 1995;20:1943–1949
  37. Deyo RA , Patrick DL . The significance of treatment effects: the clinical perspective . Med Care . 1995;33(Suppl):AS286–AS291
  38. Zweig MH , Campbell G . Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine . Clin Chem . 1993;39:561–577
  39. Rowan K . Global questions and scores . In:  Jenkinson C editors. Measuring Health and Medical Outcomes . London: University College London; 1994;p. 54–67
  40. Baker R . Measuring change in health in general practice: a comparison of a simple transition question with the Nottingham Health Profile . Int J Qual Health Care . 1998;10:207–212
  41. Jenkinson C , Peto V , Coulter A . Measuring change over time: a comparison of results from a global single item of health status and multi-dimensional SF-36 health status survey questionnaire in patients presenting with menorrhagia . Qual Life Res . 1994;3:317–321
  42. Fitzpatrick R , Ziebland S , Jenkinson C , et al.   Transition questions to assess outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis . Br J Rheumatol . 1993;32:807–811
  43. Hurny C , Bernhard J , Coates A , et al.   Responsiveness of a single-item indicator versus a multi-item scale: assessment of emotional well-being in an international adjuvant breast cancer trial . Med Care . 1996;34:234–248
  44. Norman GR , Stratford P , Regehr G . Methodological problems in the retrospective computation of responsiveness to change: the lesson of Cronbach . J Clin Epidemiol . 1997;50:869–879
  45. Krause NM , Jay GM . What do global self-rated health items measure? . Med Care . 1994;32:930–942

PII: S1013-7025(09)70049-1

doi:10.1016/S1013-7025(09)70049-1

Hong Kong Physiotherapy Journal
Volume 22, Issue 1 , Pages 40-49, 2004

Article Tools