Terkawi Abdullah Sulieman, Sullivan Michael, Abolkhair Abdullah, Al-Zhahrani Tariq, Terkawi Rayan Suliman, Alasfar Esraa M, Khait Shadi Sharif Abu, Elkabbani Ahmed, Kabbani Nasib, Altirkawi Khaild A, Tsang Siny
Department of Anesthesiology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA.
Department of Anesthesiology, King Fahad Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Saudi J Anaesth. 2017 May;11(Suppl 1):S63-S70. doi: 10.4103/sja.SJA_130_17.
The pain catastrophizing scale (PCS) is the most widely used tool to assess pain catastrophizing. The aim of this study was to translate, culturally adapt, and validate the PCS questionnaire in Arabic.
A systematic translation process was used to translate the original English PCS into Arabic. After the pilot study, we validated our version among patients with chronic pain at two tertiary care centers. We tested the reliability of our version using internal consistency and test-retest reliability. We examined the validity by assessing construct validity, concurrent validity (by investigating the associations with Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]), and face validity.
A total of 113 subjects (50 men, 63 women) were included in the study. Cronbach's α was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92-0.96), and interclass correlation coefficients was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.77-0.89) for the total scale. There was no statistically significant difference in the total PCS scores between patients who reported experiencing current pain and those who did not. Among patients who reported having current pain, pain severity was weakly associated with the total PCS scores ( = 0.22, = 0.03). PCS and its subscales were not statistically significantly associated with any of the BPI items. Nonetheless, patients who were diagnosed with neuropathic pain had statistically significantly higher scores on the total PCS, rumination, and helplessness subscales. Most patients found the PCS questions to be clear and easy to understand, and thought the questionnaire items covered all their problem areas regarding their pain catastrophizing.
Our translated version of PCS is reliable and valid for use among Arabic-speaking patients.
疼痛灾难化量表（PCS）是评估疼痛灾难化最广泛使用的工具。本研究的目的是将PCS问卷翻译成阿拉伯语，进行文化调适并验证其有效性。
采用系统翻译流程将原始英文PCS翻译成阿拉伯语。在预试验后，我们在两个三级护理中心的慢性疼痛患者中验证了我们的版本。我们使用内部一致性和重测信度来测试我们版本的信度。我们通过评估结构效度、同时效度（通过调查与简明疼痛量表[BPI]的关联）和表面效度来检验效度。
本研究共纳入113名受试者（50名男性，63名女性）。总量表的Cronbach's α为0.94（95%置信区间[CI]：0.92 - 0.96），组内相关系数为0.83（95% CI：0.77 - 0.89）。报告当前疼痛的患者与未报告当前疼痛的患者在PCS总分上无统计学显著差异。在报告当前疼痛的患者中，疼痛严重程度与PCS总分呈弱相关（ = 0.22， = 0.03）。PCS及其子量表与BPI的任何项目均无统计学显著关联。然而，被诊断为神经性疼痛的患者在PCS总量表、沉思和无助子量表上的得分有统计学显著升高。大多数患者认为PCS问题清晰易懂，并认为问卷项目涵盖了他们在疼痛灾难化方面的所有问题领域。
我们翻译的PCS版本在说阿拉伯语的患者中使用是可靠且有效的。
