Translation, cross-cultural adaptation and reliability of the German version of the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire

Thomas Benz, Susanne Lehmann, Andreas R Gantenbein, Peter S Sandor, Walter F Stewart, Achim Elfering, André G Aeschlimann, Felix Angst, Thomas Benz, Susanne Lehmann, Andreas R Gantenbein, Peter S Sandor, Walter F Stewart, Achim Elfering, André G Aeschlimann, Felix Angst

Abstract

Background: The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) is a brief questionnaire and measures headache-related disability. This study aimed to translate and cross-culturally adapt the original English version of the MIDAS to German and to test its reliability.

Methods: The standardized translation process followed international guidelines. The pre-final version was tested for clarity and comprehensibility by 34 headache sufferers. Test-retest reliability of the final version was quantified by 36 headache patients completing the MIDAS twice with an interval of 48 h. Reliability was determined by intraclass correlation coefficients and internal consistency by Cronbach's α.

Results: All steps of the translation process were followed, documented and approved by the developer of the MIDAS. The expert committee discussed in detail the complex phrasing of the questions that refer to one to another, especially exclusion of headache-days from one item to the next. The German version contains more active verb sentences and prefers the perfect to the imperfect tense. The MIDAS scales intraclass correlation coefficients ranged from 0.884 to 0.994 and was 0.991 (95% CI: 0.982-0.995) for the MIDAS total score. Cronbach's α for the MIDAS as a whole was 0.69 at test and 0.67 at retest.

Conclusions: The translation process was challenged by the comprehensibility of the questionnaire. The German version of the MIDAS is a highly reliable instrument for assessing headache related disability with moderate internal consistency. Provided validity testing of the German MIDAS is successful, it can be recommended for use in clinical practice as well as in research.

Keywords: Cross-cultural adaptation; German; MIDAS; Reliability.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Written informed consent was obtained from all participants in this study. The study protocol was approved by the Local Ethic Commission (Health Department in Aarau, Switzerland, EK AG 2008/026).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Bland-Altman plot of the MIDAS total score

References

    1. Stovner L, Hagen K, Jensen R, Katsarava Z, Lipton R, Scher A, et al. The global burden of headache: a documentation of headache prevalence and disability worldwide. Cephalalgia Int. J. Headache. 2007;27:193–210.
    1. Linde M, Gustavsson A, Stovner LJ, Steiner TJ, Barré J, Katsarava Z, et al. The cost of headache disorders in Europe: the Eurolight project. Eur J Neurol. 2012;19:703–711. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-1331.2011.03612.x.
    1. Steiner TJ, Stovner LJ, Katsarava Z, Lainez JM, Lampl C, Lantéri-Minet M, et al. The impact of headache in Europe: principal results of the Eurolight project. J Headache Pain. 2014;15:31. doi: 10.1186/1129-2377-15-31.
    1. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Dowson AJ, Sawyer J. Development and testing of the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire to assess headache-related disability. Neurology. 2001;56:S20–S28. doi: 10.1212/WNL.56.suppl_1.S20.
    1. Buse DC, Sollars CM, Steiner TJ, Jensen RH, Al Jumah MA, Lipton RB. Why HURT? A review of clinical instruments for headache management. Curr Pain Headache Rep. 2012;16:237–254. doi: 10.1007/s11916-012-0263-1.
    1. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Kolodner K. Migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) score: relation to headache frequency, pain intensity, and headache symptoms. Headache. 2003;43:258–265. doi: 10.1046/j.1526-4610.2003.03050.x.
    1. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Whyte J, Dowson A, Kolodner K, Liberman JN, et al. An international study to assess reliability of the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) score. Neurology. 1999;53:988–994. doi: 10.1212/WNL.53.5.988.
    1. Lipton RB, Stewart WF, Sawyer J, Edmeads JG. Clinical utility of an instrument assessing migraine disability: the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire. Headache J. Head face Pain. 2001;41:854–861. doi: 10.1046/j.1526-4610.2001.01156.x.
    1. Dowson AJ. Assessing the impact of migraine. Curr Med Res Opin. 2001;17:298–309. doi: 10.1185/030079901753403207.
    1. Turk DC, Dworkin RH, Revicki D, Harding G, Burke LB, Cella D, et al. Identifying important outcome domains for chronic pain clinical trials: an IMMPACT survey of people with pain. Pain. 2008;137:276–285. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2007.09.002.
    1. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Kolodner K, Liberman J, Sawyer J. Reliability of the migraine disability assessment score in a population-based sample of headache sufferers. Cephalalgia Int J Headache. 1999;19:107–114. doi: 10.1046/j.1468-2982.1999.019002107.x.
    1. Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Kolodner KB, Sawyer J, Lee C, Liberman JN. Validity of the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) score in comparison to a diary-based measure in a population sample of migraine sufferers. Pain. 2000;88:41–52. doi: 10.1016/S0304-3959(00)00305-5.
    1. Hung P-H, Fuh J-L, Wang S-J. Validity, reliability and application of the Taiwan version of the migraine disability assessment questionnaire. J Formos Med Assoc Taiwan Yi Zhi. 2006;105:563–568. doi: 10.1016/S0929-6646(09)60151-0.
    1. Magnoux E, Freeman MA, Zlotnik GMIDAS. HIT-6 French translation: reliability and correlation between tests. Cephalalgia Int. J. Headache. 2008;28:26–34. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2982.2007.01461.x.
    1. Juyal R, Verma R, Garg RK, Shukla R, Agarwal A, Singh MK. Reliability and validity of Hindi translation of the migraine disability assessment and headache impact test-6 questionnaires. Ann Indian Acad Neurol. 2010;13:276–283. doi: 10.4103/0972-2327.74201.
    1. Iigaya M, Sakai F, Kolodner KB, Lipton RB, Stewart WF. Reliability and validity of the Japanese migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire. Headache. 2003;43:343–352. doi: 10.1046/j.1526-4610.2003.03069.x.
    1. Shaik MM, Hassan NB, Tan HL, Bhaskar S, Gan SH. Validity and reliability of the Bahasa Melayu version of the migraine disability assessment questionnaire. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:435856. doi: 10.1155/2014/435856.
    1. Zandifar A, Asgari F, Haghdoost F, Masjedi SS, Manouchehri N, Banihashemi M, et al. Reliability and validity of the migraine disability assessment scale among migraine and tension type headache in Iranian patients. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:978064.
    1. Seethong P, Nimmannit A, Chaisewikul R, Prayoonwiwat N, Chotinaiwattarakul W. Reliability and validity of migraine disability assessment questionnaire-Thai version (Thai-MIDAS). J. Med. Assoc. Thail. Chotmaihet Thangphaet 2013;96 Suppl 2:S29–S38.
    1. Ertaş M, Siva A, Dalkara T, Uzuner N, Dora B, Inan L, et al. Validity and reliability of the Turkish migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire. Headache. 2004;44:786–793. doi: 10.1111/j.1526-4610.2004.04146.x.
    1. Agosti R, Chrubasik JE, Kohlmann T, MIDAS-Fragebogen D. Ars Medici. 2008;16:700–701.
    1. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25:3186–3191. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.
    1. Wild D, Grove A, Martin M, Eremenco S, McElroy S, Verjee-Lorenz A, et al. Principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) measures: report of the ISPOR task force for translation and cultural adaptation. Value Health J Int Soc Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Res. 2005;8:94–104. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2005.04054.x.
    1. Gjersing L, Caplehorn JRM, Clausen T. Cross-cultural adaptation of research instruments: language, setting, time and statistical considerations. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:13. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-10-13.
    1. Sousa VD, Rojjanasrirat W. Translation, adaptation and validation of instruments or scales for use in cross-cultural health care research: a clear and user-friendly guideline. J Eval Clin Pract. 2011;17:268–274. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x.
    1. Streiner DL, Norman GR, Cairney J. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Fifth ed. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press; 2014.
    1. Wiesinger GF, Nuhr M, Quittan M, Ebenbichler G, Wölfl G, Fialka-Moser V. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Roland-Morris questionnaire for German-speaking patients with low back pain. Spine. 1999;24:1099–1103. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199906010-00009.
    1. Donner A, Eliasziw M. Sample size requirements for reliability studies. Stat Med. 1987;6:441–448. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780060404.
    1. Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF. A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56:730–735. doi: 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00084-2.
    1. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet Lond Engl. 1986;1:307–310. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(86)90837-8.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다