Advanced search
1 file | 851.93 KB Add to list

Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Hausa version of the Oswestry Disability Index 2.1a for patients with low back pain

(2019) SPINE. 44(18). p.E1092-E1102
Author
Organization
Abstract
Study Design: Validation of a translated, culturally adapted questionnaire. Objective: To translate the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) version 2.1a into Hausa Language and to validate its use in a cohort of patients with low back pain (LBP). Summary of Background Data: The ODI is one of the most commonly used condition-specific questionnaires for assessing functional disability in patients with LBP, yet, no formal cross-culturally adapted and validated Hausa version exists. Methods: The Hausa version of the ODI 2.1a (ODI-H) was developed according to established guidelines. Validation was performed among 200 patients with LBP recruited from both rural and urban Nigeria. Reliability was assessed using internal consistency (Cronbach alpha), test-retest reliability by computing intraclass correlation coefficient, standard error of measurement, and minimal detectable change. Convergent validity was assessed by correlating the ODI-H with Visual Analogue Scale for pain, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire, and finger-floor distance test. Divergent validity was assessed by correlating the ODI-H with age, educational level, and occupational status. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis were also performed. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed with three models: 1) one-factor theory-driven model, 2) two-factor theory-driven model (dynamic and static factors), and 3) a model based on our EFA. Results: The ODI-H had high internal consistency (Cronbach alpha = 0.87) and excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.937) with standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change being 3.69 and 10.2 respectively. The construct validity (convergent and divergent validity) is supported as all (6:6, 100%) the a priori hypotheses were confirmed. The EFA yielded a two-factor model explaining 54.3% of the total variance but demonstrated poor fit. The one-factor and two-factor theory-driven model had acceptable fit but the one-factor theory-driven model was better. Conclusion: The ODI-H version 2.1a was transculturally equivalent, reliable, and valid tool for assessing functional disability among Hausa-speaking patients with LBP. The use of this tool can be recommended for future clinical and research purposes.
Keywords
cross-cultural adaptation, functional disability, Hausa, low back pain, Oswestry disability index, reliability, validity, FEAR-AVOIDANCE BELIEFS, TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY, FUNCTIONAL STATUS, CHINESE VERSION, GERMAN VERSION, PART 1, QUESTIONNAIRE, VALIDITY, SCALE, LANGUAGE

Downloads

  • (...).pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • UGent only
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 851.93 KB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Adamu, Aisha S., et al. “Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Hausa Version of the Oswestry Disability Index 2.1a for Patients with Low Back Pain.” SPINE, vol. 44, no. 18, 2019, pp. E1092–102, doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000003068.
APA
Adamu, A. S., Ibrahim, A. A., Ahmad, R. Y., Akindele, M. O., Kaka, B., & Mukhtar, N. B. (2019). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Hausa version of the Oswestry Disability Index 2.1a for patients with low back pain. SPINE, 44(18), E1092–E1102. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000003068
Chicago author-date
Adamu, Aisha S, Aminu A Ibrahim, Rufa’i Y Ahmad, Mukadas O Akindele, Bashir Kaka, and Naziru Bashir Mukhtar. 2019. “Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Hausa Version of the Oswestry Disability Index 2.1a for Patients with Low Back Pain.” SPINE 44 (18): E1092–1102. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000003068.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Adamu, Aisha S, Aminu A Ibrahim, Rufa’i Y Ahmad, Mukadas O Akindele, Bashir Kaka, and Naziru Bashir Mukhtar. 2019. “Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Hausa Version of the Oswestry Disability Index 2.1a for Patients with Low Back Pain.” SPINE 44 (18): E1092–E1102. doi:10.1097/brs.0000000000003068.
Vancouver
1.
Adamu AS, Ibrahim AA, Ahmad RY, Akindele MO, Kaka B, Mukhtar NB. Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Hausa version of the Oswestry Disability Index 2.1a for patients with low back pain. SPINE. 2019;44(18):E1092–102.
IEEE
[1]
A. S. Adamu, A. A. Ibrahim, R. Y. Ahmad, M. O. Akindele, B. Kaka, and N. B. Mukhtar, “Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Hausa version of the Oswestry Disability Index 2.1a for patients with low back pain,” SPINE, vol. 44, no. 18, pp. E1092–E1102, 2019.
@article{8616008,
  abstract     = {{Study Design: Validation of a translated, culturally adapted questionnaire.
Objective: To translate the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) version 2.1a into Hausa Language and to validate its use in a cohort of patients with low back pain (LBP).
Summary of Background Data: The ODI is one of the most commonly used condition-specific questionnaires for assessing functional disability in patients with LBP, yet, no formal cross-culturally adapted and validated Hausa version exists.
Methods: The Hausa version of the ODI 2.1a (ODI-H) was developed according to established guidelines. Validation was performed among 200 patients with LBP recruited from both rural and urban Nigeria. Reliability was assessed using internal consistency (Cronbach alpha), test-retest reliability by computing intraclass correlation coefficient, standard error of measurement, and minimal detectable change. Convergent validity was assessed by correlating the ODI-H with Visual Analogue Scale for pain, Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire, and finger-floor distance test. Divergent validity was assessed by correlating the ODI-H with age, educational level, and occupational status. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis were also performed. Confirmatory factor analysis was performed with three models: 1) one-factor theory-driven model, 2) two-factor theory-driven model (dynamic and static factors), and 3) a model based on our EFA.
Results: The ODI-H had high internal consistency (Cronbach alpha = 0.87) and excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.937) with standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change being 3.69 and 10.2 respectively. The construct validity (convergent and divergent validity) is supported as all (6:6, 100%) the a priori hypotheses were confirmed. The EFA yielded a two-factor model explaining 54.3% of the total variance but demonstrated poor fit. The one-factor and two-factor theory-driven model had acceptable fit but the one-factor theory-driven model was better.
Conclusion: The ODI-H version 2.1a was transculturally equivalent, reliable, and valid tool for assessing functional disability among Hausa-speaking patients with LBP. The use of this tool can be recommended for future clinical and research purposes.}},
  author       = {{Adamu, Aisha S and Ibrahim, Aminu A and Ahmad, Rufa’i Y and Akindele, Mukadas O and Kaka, Bashir and Mukhtar, Naziru Bashir}},
  issn         = {{0362-2436}},
  journal      = {{SPINE}},
  keywords     = {{cross-cultural adaptation,functional disability,Hausa,low back pain,Oswestry disability index,reliability,validity,FEAR-AVOIDANCE BELIEFS,TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY,FUNCTIONAL STATUS,CHINESE VERSION,GERMAN VERSION,PART 1,QUESTIONNAIRE,VALIDITY,SCALE,LANGUAGE}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{18}},
  pages        = {{E1092--E1102}},
  title        = {{Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Hausa version of the Oswestry Disability Index 2.1a for patients with low back pain}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000003068}},
  volume       = {{44}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: