Graduate Program in Medical Sciences, Health Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Florianópolis, Brazil.
Internal Medicine Department- University Hospital, 3rd floor, Health Sciences Center, Federal University of Santa Catarina (UFSC), Rua Profa. Maria Flora Pausewang, s/n. CEP 88036-800, Trindade, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil.
Adv Rheumatol. 2020 Jul 16;60(1):37. doi: 10.1186/s42358-020-00139-3.
To verify the validity of the 2016-revised Fibromyalgia Survey Questionnaire (FSQ) by telephone interview compared to self-administration and to produce a valid version of FSQ in Brazilian Portuguese language.
The Brazilian version of FSQ was produced following the recommendations for cross-cultural adaptation. Validity of Brazilian FSQ self-administration was assessed by checking agreement of its results with fibromyalgia diagnosis according the 1990 American College of Rheumatology (ACR) criteria. Reproducibility and validity of FSQ by telephone were assessed by comparing its results with the previous FSQ self-administration.
A Brazilian Portuguese version (FSQ-Brazil) was produced. FSQ-Brazil had good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha between 0.73 and 0.94). Agreement between the results obtained by self-administration of FSQ-Brazil and by telephone interview was substantial or almost perfect for almost all questions about pain sites and all questions about other somatic symptoms (Cohen's kappa higher than 0.6). There were small but significant bias toward higher scores of widespread pain index and fibromyalgia severity scale in the telephone interview compared to self-administration. Fibromyalgia definition by self-administration and telephone interview with FSQ-Brazil both revealed substantial agreement with the diagnosis based on ACR 1990 criteria (Cohen's kappa 0.62 and 0.65; respectively).
FSQ-Brazil demonstrated good internal consistency, reproducibility and validity both by self-administration and by telephone interview. However, caution must be taken with the interpretation of quantitative scores of widespread pain index and symptoms severity scale, which slightly differed according the method (self-administration or interview) in our study.
通过电话访谈验证 2016 年修订的纤维肌痛调查问卷（FSQ）的有效性，与自我管理相比，并制作巴西葡萄牙语的有效版本。
巴西版 FSQ 是根据跨文化适应的建议制作的。通过检查根据 1990 年美国风湿病学会（ACR）标准得出的 FSQ 自我管理结果与纤维肌痛诊断的一致性，评估巴西 FSQ 自我管理的有效性。通过比较其结果与之前的 FSQ 自我管理，评估 FSQ 通过电话的再现性和有效性。
制作了巴西葡萄牙语版本（FSQ-Brazil）。FSQ-Brazil 具有良好的内部一致性（Cronbach 的 alpha 在 0.73 到 0.94 之间）。FSQ-Brazil 自我管理和电话访谈获得的结果之间的一致性对于几乎所有关于疼痛部位的问题和其他躯体症状的所有问题都是实质性或几乎完美的（Cohen 的 kappa 高于 0.6）。与自我管理相比，电话访谈中广泛性疼痛指数和纤维肌痛严重程度量表的评分略高，但存在小而显著的偏差。通过自我管理和电话访谈使用 FSQ-Brazil 定义纤维肌痛与基于 ACR 1990 标准的诊断均具有实质性一致性（Cohen 的 kappa 分别为 0.62 和 0.65）。
FSQ-Brazil 表现出良好的内部一致性、再现性和有效性，无论是自我管理还是电话访谈。然而，必须注意对广泛性疼痛指数和症状严重程度量表的定量评分的解释，在我们的研究中，根据方法（自我管理或访谈）略有不同。
