The Brazilian version of STarT Back Screening Tool - translation, cross-cultural adaptation and reliability

Bruna Pilz, Rodrigo A Vasconcelos, Freddy B Marcondes, Samuel S Lodovichi, Wilson Mello, Débora B Grossi, Bruna Pilz, Rodrigo A Vasconcelos, Freddy B Marcondes, Samuel S Lodovichi, Wilson Mello, Débora B Grossi

Abstract

Background: Psychosocial factors are not routinely identified in physical therapy assessments, although they can influence the prognosis of patients with low back pain. The "STarT Back Screening Tool" (SBST) questionnaire aids in screening such patients for poor prognosis in the primary care setting and classifies them as high, medium, or low risk based on physical and psychosocial factors.

Objectives: This study sought to translate and cross-culturally adapt the SBST to the Brazilian Portuguese language and test the reliability of the Brazilian version.

Method: The first stage of the study consisted of the translation, synthesis, and back-translation of the original version of the STSB, including revision by the Translation Group, pretest of the translated version, and assessment by an expert panel. The pre-final Brazilian version was applied to 2 samples comprising 52 patients with low back pain; these patients were of both genders and older than 18 years of age. To assess the instrument's reliability, an additional sample comprising 50 patients was subjected to 2 interviews, and the results were assessed using the quadratic weighted kappa value. The instrument's internal consistency was assessed using Cronbach's alpha (n=105), and the standard error of measurement was also calculated (n=50).

Results: Translation and back-translation attained consensus, and only item 6 required changes; the reformulated version was applied to an additional sample comprising 52 individuals who did not report any doubts related to this item. The reliability of the SBST-Brazil was 0.79 (95% confidence interval: 0.63-0.95), the internal consistency was 0.74 for the total score and 0.72 for the psychosocial subscale, and the standard error of measurement was 1.9%.

Conclusion: The translated and cross-culturally adapted SBST-Brazil proved to be reliable for screening patients according to their risk of poor prognosis and the presence of psychosocial factors.

Figures

Figure 1. SBST scoring system12,14,18
Figure 1. SBST scoring system12,14,18

References

    1. Hoy D, Bain C, Williams G, March L, Brooks P, Blyth F, et al. A systematic review of the global prevalence of low back pain. Arthritis Rheum. 2012;64(6):2028–2037.
    1. van Tulder M, Becker A, Bekkering T, Breen A, del Real MT, Hutchinson A, et al. Chapter 3. European guidelines for the management of acute nonspecific low back pain in primary care. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(S2, Suppl 2):S169–S191.
    1. Apeldoorn AT, Bosselaar H, Ostelo RW, Blom-Luberti T, van der Ploeg T, Fritz JM, et al. Identification of patients with chronic low back pain who might benefit from additional psychological assessment. Clin J Pain. 2012;28(1):23–31.
    1. Nicholas MK. Depression in people with pain: There is still work to do. Commentary on 'Understanding the link between depression and pain'. Scandinavian Journal of Pain. 2011;2(2):45–46.
    1. Linton SJ, Shaw WS. Impact of psychological factors in the experience of pain. Phys Ther. 2011;91(5):700–711.
    1. Nicholas MK. Mental disorders in people with chronic pain: an international perspective. Pain. 2007;129(3):231–232.
    1. Airaksinen O, Brox JI, Cedraschi C, Hildebrandt J, Klaber-Moffett J, Kovacs F, et al. Chapter 4. European guidelines for the management of chronic nonspecific low back pain. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(S2, Suppl 2):S192–S300.
    1. Nicholas MK, Linton SJ, Watson PJ, Main CJ. Early identification and management of psychological risk factors ("yellow flags") in patients with low back pain: a reappraisal. Phys Ther. 2011;91(5):737–753.
    1. Pincus T, Burton AK, Vogel S, Field AP. A systematic review of psychological factors as predictors of chronicity/ disability in prospective cohorts of low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002;27(5):E109–E120.
    1. Hill JC, Fritz JM. Psychosocial influences on low back pain, disability, and response to treatment. Phys Ther. 2011;91(5):712–721.
    1. Foster NE, Thomas E, Bishop A, Dunn KM, Main CJ. Distinctiveness of psychological obstacles to recovery in low back pain patients in primary care. Pain. 2010;148(3):398–406.
    1. Fritz JM, Beneciuk JM, George SZ. Relationship between categorization with the STarT Back Screening Tool and prognosis for people receiving physical therapy for low back pain. Phys Ther. 2011;91(5):722–732.
    1. Main CJ, Sowden G, Hill JC, Watson PJ, Hay EM. Integrating physical and psychological approaches to treatment in low back pain: the development and content of the STarT Back trial's 'high-risk'intervention (StarT Back; ISRCTN 37113406) Physiotherapy. 2012;98(2):110–116.
    1. Hill JC, Dunn KM, Lewis M, Mullis R, Main CJ, Foster NE, et al. A primary care back pain screening tool: identifying patient subgroups for initial treatment. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59(5):632–641.
    1. Beneciuk JM, Bishop MD, Fritz JM, Robinson ME, Asal NR, Nisenzon AN, et al. The STarT back screening tool and individual psychological measures: evaluation of prognostic capabilities for low back pain clinical outcomes in outpatient physical therapy settings. Phys Ther. 2013;93(3):321–333.
    1. Wideman TH, Hill JC, Main CJ, Lewis M, Sullivan MJL, Hay EM. Comparing the responsiveness of a brief, multidimensional risk screening tool for back pain to its unidimensional reference standards: the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Pain. 2012;153(11):2182–2191.
    1. Hill JC, Vohora K, Dunn KM, Main CJ, Hay EM. Comparing the STarT back screening tool's subgroup allocation of individual patients with that of independent clinical experts. Clin J Pain. 2010;26(9):783–787.
    1. Hill JC, Whitehurst DGT, Lewis M, Bryan S, Dunn KM, Foster NE, et al. Comparison of stratified primary care management for low back pain with current best practice (STarT Back): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2011;378(9802):1560–1571.
    1. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25(24):3186–3191.
    1. Nusbaum L, Natour J, Ferraz MB, Goldenberg J. Translation, adaptation and validation of the Roland-Morris questionnaire-Brazil Roland-Morris. Braz J Med Biol Res. 2001;34(2):203–210.
    1. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63(7):737–745.
    1. Salaffi F, Sarzi-Puttini P, Ciapetti A, Atzeni F. Clinimetric evaluations of patients with chronic widespread pain. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2011;25(2):249–270.
    1. Lauridsen HH, Hartvigsen J, Manniche C, Korsholm L, Grunnet-Nilsson N. Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference for pain and disability instruments in low back pain patients. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006;7(1):82–82.
    1. Terwee CB, Bot SDM, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.
    1. Sim J, Wright CC. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther. 2005;85(3):257–268.
    1. Beaton DE. Understanding the relevance of measured change through studies of responsiveness. Spine. 2000;25(24):3192–3199.
    1. Magalhães MO, Costa LO, Ferreira ML, Machado LA. Clinimetric testing of two instruments that measure attitudes and beliefs of health care providers about chronic low back pain. Rev Bras Fisioter. 2011;15(3):249–256.
    1. Marcondes FB, Vasconcelos RA, Marchetto A, Andrade ALL, Zoppi A, Filho, Etchebehere M. Tradução e adaptação cultural do Rowe Score para a língua portuguesa. Acta Ortop Bras. 2012;20(6):346–350.
    1. [2014 March 27];North Staffordshire: The STarT Back Screening tool website [Internet] 2013 a Available from:
    1. Bruyère O, Demoulin M, Beaudart C, Hill JC, Maquet D, Genevay S, et al. Validity and reliability of the French Version of the STarT back screening tool for patients with low back pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2014;39(2):E123–E128.
    1. Azimi P, Shahzadi S, Azhari S, Montazeri A. A validation study of the Iranian version of STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) in lumbar central canal stenosis patients. J Orthop Sci. 2014;19(2):213–217.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera