Measuring chronic rheumatic Pain in Mexican Americans: Cross-cultural adaptation of the McGill Pain Questionnaire

IF 7.3 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Journal of Clinical Epidemiology Pub Date : 1996-12-01 DOI:10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00276-4
Agustin Escalante , Michael J. Lichtenstein , Nancy Ríos , Helen P. Hazuda
{"title":"Measuring chronic rheumatic Pain in Mexican Americans: Cross-cultural adaptation of the McGill Pain Questionnaire","authors":"Agustin Escalante ,&nbsp;Michael J. Lichtenstein ,&nbsp;Nancy Ríos ,&nbsp;Helen P. Hazuda","doi":"10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00276-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We performed a cross-cultural adaptation of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) from English to Spanish for studying Mexican Americans in South Texas. Each of the 78 single-word pain descriptors in the original MPQ was translated into Spanish by a panel of nine bilingual health researchers, preserving the original structure of the questionnaire. The pain-intensity content (PIC) of the words in each language was then rated on a 100 mm visual analog scale by 8 bilingual health care providers and 10 bilingual health-care consumers. The correlation between Spanish and English average PIC ratings was strong (<em>r</em> = 0.85 for providers, <em>r</em> = 0.80 for consumers). The translated Spanish version was compared to the original English in a group of 50 bilingual Mexican-American patients with musculoskeletal pain, who completed the MPQ in both languages. There was no difference in Average Pain Rating Index between the Spanish and English versions (29.8 ± 14.7 vs 29.1 ± 15.8, <em>p</em> = 0.55), and agreement between the two language versions was almost perfect (<em>r</em><sub>1</sub> = 0.85). Test-retest reliability was measured in two groups of hospitalized patients (25 per group), one composed of monolingual Spanish speakers and the other of monolingual English speakers. Each subject completed the MPQ, the McGill Pain Map, two 10-cm visual analog scales measuring pain now and within the past week, the bodily pain items of the MOS-SF36 survey, and the Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire, on two occasions one day apart. Test-retest reliability of the Spanish and English components of the MPQ was not significantly different and was comparable to that of the other pain and health status instruments. We conclude that the Spanish MPQ is cross-culturally equivalent to the original English and has similar concurrent validity and reliability. This questionnaire is suitable for cross-cultural studies of pain comparing Spanish-speaking Mexican Americans with English-speaking members of the same and other ethnic groups.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","volume":"49 12","pages":"Pages 1389-1399"},"PeriodicalIF":7.3000,"publicationDate":"1996-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/S0895-4356(96)00276-4","citationCount":"36","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0895435696002764","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 36

Abstract

We performed a cross-cultural adaptation of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ) from English to Spanish for studying Mexican Americans in South Texas. Each of the 78 single-word pain descriptors in the original MPQ was translated into Spanish by a panel of nine bilingual health researchers, preserving the original structure of the questionnaire. The pain-intensity content (PIC) of the words in each language was then rated on a 100 mm visual analog scale by 8 bilingual health care providers and 10 bilingual health-care consumers. The correlation between Spanish and English average PIC ratings was strong (r = 0.85 for providers, r = 0.80 for consumers). The translated Spanish version was compared to the original English in a group of 50 bilingual Mexican-American patients with musculoskeletal pain, who completed the MPQ in both languages. There was no difference in Average Pain Rating Index between the Spanish and English versions (29.8 ± 14.7 vs 29.1 ± 15.8, p = 0.55), and agreement between the two language versions was almost perfect (r1 = 0.85). Test-retest reliability was measured in two groups of hospitalized patients (25 per group), one composed of monolingual Spanish speakers and the other of monolingual English speakers. Each subject completed the MPQ, the McGill Pain Map, two 10-cm visual analog scales measuring pain now and within the past week, the bodily pain items of the MOS-SF36 survey, and the Modified Health Assessment Questionnaire, on two occasions one day apart. Test-retest reliability of the Spanish and English components of the MPQ was not significantly different and was comparable to that of the other pain and health status instruments. We conclude that the Spanish MPQ is cross-culturally equivalent to the original English and has similar concurrent validity and reliability. This questionnaire is suitable for cross-cultural studies of pain comparing Spanish-speaking Mexican Americans with English-speaking members of the same and other ethnic groups.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
测量墨西哥裔美国人慢性风湿性疼痛:麦吉尔疼痛问卷的跨文化适应
为了研究南德克萨斯州的墨西哥裔美国人,我们对英语的麦吉尔疼痛问卷(MPQ)进行了跨文化改编。原始MPQ中78个单字疼痛描述词中的每一个都由9名双语健康研究人员组成的小组翻译成西班牙语,保留了问卷的原始结构。然后由8名双语医疗保健提供者和10名双语医疗保健消费者对每种语言中单词的疼痛强度内容(PIC)进行100毫米视觉模拟评分。西班牙语和英语平均PIC评级之间的相关性很强(提供者r = 0.85,消费者r = 0.80)。在一组50名患有肌肉骨骼疼痛的双语墨西哥裔美国患者中,将翻译的西班牙语版本与原始的英语版本进行了比较,这些患者用两种语言完成了MPQ。西班牙语和英语版本的平均疼痛评分指数无差异(29.8±14.7 vs 29.1±15.8,p = 0.55),两种语言版本的一致性几乎完全(r1 = 0.85)。在两组住院患者(每组25人)中测量了重测信度,一组由单语西班牙语者组成,另一组由单语英语者组成。每位受试者分别完成MPQ、McGill疼痛图、两个测量当前和过去一周内疼痛的10厘米视觉模拟量表、MOS-SF36调查中的身体疼痛项目和修改健康评估问卷,两次间隔一天。MPQ的西班牙语和英语部分的重测信度无显著差异,与其他疼痛和健康状况工具的信度相当。我们得出结论,西班牙语MPQ与原英语具有跨文化等效性,并且具有相似的并发效度和信度。本问卷适用于比较讲西班牙语的墨西哥裔美国人与讲英语的墨西哥裔美国人和其他种族的痛楚的跨文化研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
6.90%
发文量
320
审稿时长
44 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Epidemiology strives to enhance the quality of clinical and patient-oriented healthcare research by advancing and applying innovative methods in conducting, presenting, synthesizing, disseminating, and translating research results into optimal clinical practice. Special emphasis is placed on training new generations of scientists and clinical practice leaders.
期刊最新文献
Artificial intelligence to semi-automate trustworthiness assessment of randomized controlled trials: correspondence: response to Au et al. Carbon emissions associated with clinical trials: A scoping review. Shortcomings in reporting country-level participation in multi-centre randomised controlled trials involving Ireland as a collaborating partner: A meta-research study. A scoping review of the assessment reports of genetic or genomic tests reveals inconsistent consideration of key dimensions of clinical utility. Corrigendum to 'Methodological systematic review recommends improvements to conduct and reporting when meta-analyzing interrupted time series studies'. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 145 (2022) 55-69.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1