Iigaya Miho, Sakai Fumihiko, Kolodner Kenneth B, Lipton Richard B, Stewart Walter F
Department of Neurology, Kitasato University, Kitasato 1-15-1, Sagamihara-shi, Kanagawa, Japan.
Headache. 2003 Apr;43(4):343-52. doi: 10.1046/j.1526-4610.2003.03069.x.
This study was designed to assess the test-retest reliability, internal consistency, and validity of a Japanese translation of the Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) Questionnaire in a sample of Japanese patients with headache.
Previous studies have demonstrated that the English-language version of the MIDAS Questionnaire is a reliable and valid instrument for the assessment of migraine-related disability. Any translations of the MIDAS Questionnaire must also be assessed for reliability and validity.
Study participants were recruited from the patient population attending either the Neurology Department of Kitasato University or an affiliated clinic. Participants were eligible for study entry if they had 6 or more primary headaches per year. For reliability testing, participants completed the MIDAS Questionnaire on 2 occasions, exactly 2 weeks apart. To assess validity, patients were also invited to participate in a 90-day daily diary study. Composite measures from the 90-day diaries were compared to equivalent MIDAS measures (ie, 5 questions on headache-related disability and 1 question each on average pain intensity and headache frequency in the last 3 months) and to the total MIDAS score obtained from a third MIDAS Questionnaire completed at the end of this 90-day period.
One hundred one patients between the ages of 21 and 77 years were recruited (81 women and 20 men). Ninety-nine patients (80 women and 19 men) participated in the diary study. At baseline, 46.5% of patients were MIDAS grade I or II (minimal, mild, or infrequent disability), 22.2% were MIDAS grade III (moderate disability), and 31.3% were MIDAS grade IV (severe disability). Test-retest Spearman correlations for the 5 disability questions and the questions on average pain intensity and headache frequency ranged from 0.59 to 0.80 (P<.0001). The test-retest Spearman correlation coefficient for the total MIDAS score was 0.83 (P<.0001). The degree to which individual MIDAS questions correlated with the diary-based measures ranged from 0.36 to 0.88. The correlation between the total MIDAS score and the equivalent diary-based measure was 0.66. In general, the mean and median values for the MIDAS items and total MIDAS score were similar to the means and medians for the diary-based measures. However, the mean MIDAS scores for the number of days on which headache was experienced and the number of missed workdays were significantly different compared to the diary-based estimates for these items (P<.05). In addition, the mean MIDAS score for the number of days of missed housework was significantly higher than the corresponding diary-based estimate (P<.01).
The results from this study show that the Japanese translation of the MIDAS Questionnaire is comparable with the English-language version in terms of reliability and validity.
本研究旨在评估偏头痛残疾评估（MIDAS）问卷日语版在日本头痛患者样本中的重测信度、内部一致性和效度。
先前的研究表明，MIDAS问卷的英文版是评估偏头痛相关残疾的可靠且有效的工具。MIDAS问卷的任何翻译版本也必须进行信度和效度评估。
研究参与者从北里大学神经内科或附属诊所的患者群体中招募。如果参与者每年有6次或更多次原发性头痛，则符合研究入组条件。为了进行信度测试，参与者在相隔正好2周的两个时间点完成MIDAS问卷。为了评估效度，患者还被邀请参加一项为期90天的每日日记研究。将90天日记中的综合测量结果与等效的MIDAS测量结果（即关于头痛相关残疾的5个问题以及关于过去3个月平均疼痛强度和头痛频率各1个问题）以及在这90天结束时完成的第三份MIDAS问卷获得的总MIDAS分数进行比较。
招募了101名年龄在21至77岁之间的患者（81名女性和20名男性）。99名患者（80名女性和19名男性）参与了日记研究。在基线时，46.5%的患者为MIDAS I级或II级（最小、轻度或不频繁残疾），22.2%为MIDAS III级（中度残疾），31.3%为MIDAS IV级（重度残疾）。5个残疾问题以及平均疼痛强度和头痛频率问题的重测斯皮尔曼相关性在0.59至0.80之间（P<0.0001）。总MIDAS分数的重测斯皮尔曼相关系数为0.83（P<0.0001）。各个MIDAS问题与基于日记的测量结果之间的相关程度在0.36至0.88之间。总MIDAS分数与等效的基于日记的测量结果之间的相关性为0.66。总体而言，MIDAS项目和总MIDAS分数的均值和中位数与基于日记的测量结果的均值和中位数相似。然而，经历头痛天数和错过工作日数的MIDAS平均分数与基于日记的这些项目估计值相比有显著差异（P<0.05）。此外，错过家务天数的MIDAS平均分数显著高于相应的基于日记的估计值（P<0.01）。
本研究结果表明，MIDAS问卷的日语版在信度和效度方面与英文版相当。
