Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, Norway.
Phys Ther. 2012 Jan;92(1):111-23. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20110076. Epub 2011 Oct 20.
There is little evidence for the measurement properties of instruments commonly used for women with pelvic girdle pain.
The aim of this study was to examine the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity of instruments used for women with pelvic girdle pain.
This was a cross-sectional methodology study, including test-retest reliability assessment.
Women with pelvic girdle pain in pregnancy and after delivery participated in a postal survey that included the Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire (PGQ), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Disability Rating Index (DRI), Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and 8-item version of the Medical
Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire (SF-36). Test-retest reliability was assessed with a random subsample 1 week later. Internal consistency was assessed with the Cronbach alpha, and test-retest reliability was assessed with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and minimal detectable change (MDC). Construct validity based on hypotheses was assessed by correlation analysis. Discriminant validity was assessed with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.
All participants responded to the main (N=87) and test-retest (n=42) surveys. Cronbach alpha values ranged from .88 to .94, and ICCs ranged from .78 to .94. The MDC at the individual level constituted about 7% to 14% of total scores for the 8-item version of the SF-36, ODI, and PGQ activity subscale; about 18% to 22% for the DRI, PGQ symptom subscale, and PCS; and about 25% for the FABQ. Hypotheses were mostly confirmed by correlations between the instruments. The PGQ was the only instrument that significantly discriminated participants who were pregnant from participants who were not pregnant as well as pain locations.
A comparison of responsiveness to change of the various instruments used in this study was not undertaken, but will be carried out in a future study.
Self-report instruments for assessing health showed good internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity for women with pelvic girdle pain. The PGQ was the only instrument with satisfactory discriminant validity, thus, it is recommended for evaluating symptoms and disability in patients with pelvic girdle pain.
用于骨盆带疼痛女性的常用工具的测量特性证据很少。
本研究旨在评估用于骨盆带疼痛女性的工具的内部一致性、重测信度和结构有效性。
这是一项横断面方法学研究，包括重测信度评估。
参与妊娠和产后骨盆带疼痛的女性参加了一项邮寄调查，其中包括骨盆带问卷（PGQ）、Oswestry 残疾指数（ODI）、残疾评定指数（DRI）、恐惧回避信念问卷（FABQ）、疼痛灾难化量表（PCS）和 8 项版医疗
研究 36 项简短健康调查问卷（SF-36）。重测信度通过随机子样本在一周后进行评估。内部一致性用 Cronbach 阿尔法评估，重测信度用组内相关系数（ICC）和最小可检测变化（MDC）评估。基于假设的结构有效性通过相关分析评估。判别有效性通过接收者操作特征曲线下的面积评估。
所有参与者均回复了主要（N=87）和重测（n=42）调查。Cronbach 阿尔法值范围为.88 至.94，ICC 值范围为.78 至.94。SF-36、ODI 和 PGQ 活动分量表的 8 项版本、DRI、PGQ 症状分量表和 PCS 的 MDC 约占总分的 7%至 14%；FABQ 约占 25%。仪器之间的相关性大多证实了假设。PGQ 是唯一一种能够区分孕妇和非孕妇以及疼痛部位的工具。
本研究中使用的各种仪器的变化反应性比较未进行，但将在未来的研究中进行。
用于评估骨盆带疼痛女性健康的自我报告工具具有良好的内部一致性、重测信度和结构有效性。PGQ 是唯一具有令人满意的判别有效性的工具，因此，建议用于评估骨盆带疼痛患者的症状和残疾。
