Is it time to rethink disability assessment in low back pain? Reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity of the Brazilian WHODAS 2.0 for chronic low back pain

Author:

Silva Tuyra Francisca Castro e12ORCID,Medeiros Paula Maciel de Sousa Silva3,Leite Camila Ferreira1,Castro Shamyr Sulyvan14,Nunes Ana Carla Lima1,Jesus‐Moraleida Fabianna Resende1

Affiliation:

1. Master Program in Physiotherapy and Functioning Federal University of Ceará Fortaleza Brazil

2. Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Ceará Fortaleza Brazil

3. Universidade de Fortaleza (UNIFOR) Washington Soares Avenue Fortaleza Brazil

4. Master Program of Public Health Federal University of Ceará Fortaleza Brazil

Abstract

AbstractBackground and PurposeThe World Health Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) was developed to assess health and disability based on the biopsychosocial model. The WHODAS 2.0 has not been validated for Brazilians with chronic non‐specific low back pain (LBP). We aimed to evaluate the reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity of the Brazilian version of the WHODAS 2.0 in patients with chronic LBP.MethodsMethodological study. The Brazilian version of the WHODAS 2.0 was applied to 100 volunteers with chronic nonspecific LBP. Test‐retest reliability, internal consistency, and construct validity were assessed using the Spearman correlation test, Cronbach's alpha (α) coefficient, and Spearman's correlation test between WHODAS 2.0, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Roland‐Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), respectively.ResultsWHODAS 2.0 showed satisfactory test‐retest reliability with a moderate correlation for total WHODAS 2.0 (r = 0.75, p < 0.05). Internal consistency was adequate for all domains and total score (α = 0.82–0.96). Regarding construct validity, WHODAS 2.0, ODI (r = 0.70, p < 0.05), and WHODAS 2.0 and RMDQ (r = 0.71, p < 0.05) had significant correlations. Total WHODAS 2.0 and FABQ‐Phys subscale scores correlated moderately (r = 0.66, p < 0.05).DiscussionThe Brazilian WHODAS 2.0 was proved to be a valid and reliable tool for patients with chronic LBP. The item referring to sexual intercourse had 27% and 30% of the missing values during the test and retest stage, respectively and had a high percentage of missing data for work‐related questions (41% missing data) in the life activities domain; therefore, the data must be interpreted with caution.Implications for Physiotherapy PracticeWHODAS 2.0 can be used as a disability assessment strategy from a biopsychosocial perspective in this population.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3