Liu Hui, Tao Huiren, Luo Zhuojing
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Xijing Hospital, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, China.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 May 15;34(11):1211-6; discussion 1217. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31819e2b34.
Translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation were performed on the Chinese version of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI).
The objective of this study was to translate and adapt the ODI into simplified Chinese and to then validate its use in Chinese patients with low back pain.
A traditional Chinese version of the ODI (TCODI) has been developed and used in Hong Kong. However, there is no simplified Chinese version of the ODI (SCODI).
Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the latest version of the ODI (2.1a) were performed following instructions from the published international guidelines. The translation procedure included forward translation, back translation, and a discussion among experts. The prefinal version was tested in 40 outpatients with LBP. Then, 179 patients with LBP, including 140 outpatients and 39 inpatients, participated in the final test. They finished the SCODI, the Short-Form 36, and the Visual Analog Scale. Those 39 inpatients also finished a second ODI questionnaire within 24 hours. Last, the SCODI and TCODI were tested in another 25 inpatients for comparison.
All of the patients in the prefinal test understood the simplified Chinese version correctly. In the final test, Cronbach's alpha for internal consistency was 0.93. A very high intraclass correlation coefficient was observed (ICC = 0.99) in the test-retest group. The SCODI showed a significant correlation with the 8 subscales of the Short-Form 36, especially in physical functioning (r = 0.78, P < 0.001). There was a moderate correlation between the ODI scores and the Visual Analog Scale (r = 0.69, P < 0.001). A significant difference in the mean score was demonstrated between the SCODI and the TCODI. Patients who participated in the comparison test all agreed that the SCODI was easier to understand than the TCODI.
The results showed that the translation and adaptation were successful. The SCODI has proven to be valid and reliable when used in the simplified Chinese speaking population.
对奥斯威斯残疾指数（ODI）中文版进行了翻译、跨文化调适及验证。
本研究旨在将ODI翻译成简体中文并进行调适，随后验证其在中国大陆腰痛患者中的应用效果。
传统的ODI中文版（TCODI）已在香港地区开发并使用。然而，目前尚无ODI的简体中文版（SCODI）。
按照已发表的国际指南中的说明，对最新版ODI（2.1a）进行翻译和跨文化调适。翻译过程包括正向翻译、反向翻译以及专家讨论。预终版在40名腰痛门诊患者中进行了测试。随后，179例腰痛患者参与了最终测试，其中包括140例门诊患者和39例住院患者。他们完成了SCODI、简明健康状况调查量表（Short-Form 36）和视觉模拟评分量表（Visual Analog Scale）。这39例住院患者还在24小时内完成了第二份ODI问卷。最后，在另外25例住院患者中对SCODI和TCODI进行了比较测试。
预终版测试中的所有患者均能正确理解简体中文版。在最终测试中，内部一致性的Cronbach's α系数为0.93。在重测组中观察到非常高的组内相关系数（ICC = 0.99）。SCODI与简明健康状况调查量表的8个分量表显示出显著相关性，尤其是在身体功能方面（r = 0.78，P < 0.001）。ODI评分与视觉模拟评分量表之间存在中度相关性（r = 0.69，P < 0.001）。SCODI和TCODI的平均分显示出显著差异。参与比较测试的患者均认为SCODI比TCODI更易于理解。
结果表明翻译和调适是成功的。SCODI在简体中文人群中使用时已被证明是有效且可靠的。
