Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 1/2012

01-01-2012 | Original Article

Reliability and validity of the cross-culturally adapted French version of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) in patients with low back pain

Authors: Stéphane Genevay, Christine Cedraschi, Marc Marty, Sylvie Rozenberg, Pierre De Goumoëns, Antonio Faundez, Federico Balagué, François Porchet, Anne F. Mannion

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 1/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To conduct a cross-cultural adaptation of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) into French according to established guidelines.

Methods

Seventy outpatients with chronic low back pain were recruited from six spine centres in Switzerland and France. They completed the newly translated COMI, and the Roland Morris disability (RMQ), Dallas Pain (DPQ), adjectival pain rating scale, WHO Quality of Life, and EuroQoL-5D questionnaires. After ~14 days RMQ and COMI were completed again to assess reproducibility; a transition question (7-point Likert scale; “very much worse” through “no change” to “very much better”) indicated any change in status since the first questionnaire.

Results

COMI whole scores displayed no floor effects and just 1.5% ceiling effects. The scores for the individual COMI items correlated with their corresponding full-length reference questionnaire with varying strengths of correlation (0.33–0.84, P < 0.05). COMI whole scores showed a very good correlation with the “multidimensional” DPQ global score (Rho = 0.71). 55 patients (79%) returned a second questionnaire with no/minimal change in their back status. The reproducibility of individual COMI 5-point items was good, with test–retest differences within one grade ranging from 89% for ‘social/work disability’ to 98% for ‘symptom-specific well-being’. The intraclass correlation coefficient for the COMI whole score was 0.85 (95% CI 0.76–0.91).

Conclusions

In conclusion, the French version of this short, multidimensional questionnaire showed good psychometric properties, comparable to those reported for German and Spanish versions. The French COMI represents a valuable tool for future multicentre clinical studies and surgical registries (e.g. SSE Spine Tango) in French-speaking countries.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJ, Bombardier C, Croft P, Koes B, Malmivaara A, Roland M, Von Korff M, Waddell G (1998) Outcome measures for low back pain research. A proposal for standardized use. Spine 23:2003–2013PubMedCrossRef Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJ, Bombardier C, Croft P, Koes B, Malmivaara A, Roland M, Von Korff M, Waddell G (1998) Outcome measures for low back pain research. A proposal for standardized use. Spine 23:2003–2013PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Mannion AF, Porchet F, Kleinstuck FS, Lattig F, Jeszenszky D, Bartanusz V, Dvorak J, Grob D (2009) The quality of spine surgery from the patient’s perspective. Part 1: the Core Outcome Measures Index in clinical practice. Eur Spine J 18 Suppl 3:367–373 Mannion AF, Porchet F, Kleinstuck FS, Lattig F, Jeszenszky D, Bartanusz V, Dvorak J, Grob D (2009) The quality of spine surgery from the patient’s perspective. Part 1: the Core Outcome Measures Index in clinical practice. Eur Spine J 18 Suppl 3:367–373
3.
go back to reference Mannion AF, Elfering A, Staerkle R, Junge A, Grob D, Semmer NK, Jacobshagen N, Dvorak J, Boos N (2005) Outcome assessment in low back pain: how low can you go? Eur Spine J 14:1014–1026PubMedCrossRef Mannion AF, Elfering A, Staerkle R, Junge A, Grob D, Semmer NK, Jacobshagen N, Dvorak J, Boos N (2005) Outcome assessment in low back pain: how low can you go? Eur Spine J 14:1014–1026PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Ferrer M, Pellise F, Escudero O, Alvarez L, Pont A, Alonso J, Deyo R (2006) Validation of a minimum outcome core set in the evaluation of patients with back pain. Spine 31:1372–1379 (discussion 1380)PubMedCrossRef Ferrer M, Pellise F, Escudero O, Alvarez L, Pont A, Alonso J, Deyo R (2006) Validation of a minimum outcome core set in the evaluation of patients with back pain. Spine 31:1372–1379 (discussion 1380)PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Zweig T, Mannion AF, Grob D, Melloh M, Munting E, Tuschel A, Aebi M, Roder C (2009) How to Tango: a manual for implementing Spine Tango. Eur Spine J 18 Suppl 3:312–320PubMedCrossRef Zweig T, Mannion AF, Grob D, Melloh M, Munting E, Tuschel A, Aebi M, Roder C (2009) How to Tango: a manual for implementing Spine Tango. Eur Spine J 18 Suppl 3:312–320PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Costa LO, Maher CG, Latimer J (2007) Self-report outcome measures for low back pain: searching for international cross-cultural adaptations. Spine 32:1028–1037PubMedCrossRef Costa LO, Maher CG, Latimer J (2007) Self-report outcome measures for low back pain: searching for international cross-cultural adaptations. Spine 32:1028–1037PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25:3186–3191PubMedCrossRef Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25:3186–3191PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Koke AJ (1996) Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments. Pain 65:71–76PubMedCrossRef Beurskens AJ, de Vet HC, Koke AJ (1996) Responsiveness of functional status in low back pain: a comparison of different instruments. Pain 65:71–76PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Health PoM (1996) WHOQOL bref introduction, administration scoring and generic version of the assesment. In: WHO (ed) WHO, Geneva Health PoM (1996) WHOQOL bref introduction, administration scoring and generic version of the assesment. In: WHO (ed) WHO, Geneva
10.
go back to reference Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42PubMedCrossRef Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Steiner D, Norman G (1995) Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford Medical Publications, Oxford Steiner D, Norman G (1995) Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford Medical Publications, Oxford
12.
go back to reference Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale NJ Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale NJ
13.
go back to reference Nevill AM, Lane AM, Kilgour LJ, Bowes N, Whyte GP (2001) Stability of psychometric questionnaires. J Sports Sci 19:273–278PubMedCrossRef Nevill AM, Lane AM, Kilgour LJ, Bowes N, Whyte GP (2001) Stability of psychometric questionnaires. J Sports Sci 19:273–278PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Marty M, Blotman F, Avouac B, Rozenberg S, Valat JP (1998) Validation of the French version of the Dallas Pain Questionnaire in chronic low back pain patients. Rev Rhum Engl Ed 65:126–134PubMed Marty M, Blotman F, Avouac B, Rozenberg S, Valat JP (1998) Validation of the French version of the Dallas Pain Questionnaire in chronic low back pain patients. Rev Rhum Engl Ed 65:126–134PubMed
15.
go back to reference Lawlis GF, Cuencas R, Selby D, McCoy CE (1989) The development of the Dallas Pain Questionnaire. An assessment of the impact of spinal pain on behavior. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 14:511–516CrossRef Lawlis GF, Cuencas R, Selby D, McCoy CE (1989) The development of the Dallas Pain Questionnaire. An assessment of the impact of spinal pain on behavior. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 14:511–516CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Pincus T, Yazici Y, Sokka T (2007) Quantitative measures of rheumatic diseases for clinical research versus standard clinical care: differences, advantages and limitations. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 21:601–628PubMedCrossRef Pincus T, Yazici Y, Sokka T (2007) Quantitative measures of rheumatic diseases for clinical research versus standard clinical care: differences, advantages and limitations. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 21:601–628PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Fransen J, Moens HB, Speyer I, van Riel PL (2005) Effectiveness of systematic monitoring of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity in daily practice: a multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis 64:1294–1298PubMedCrossRef Fransen J, Moens HB, Speyer I, van Riel PL (2005) Effectiveness of systematic monitoring of rheumatoid arthritis disease activity in daily practice: a multicentre, cluster randomised controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis 64:1294–1298PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Staerkle RF, Villiger P (2011) Simple questionnaire for assessing core outcomes in inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 98:148–155 Staerkle RF, Villiger P (2011) Simple questionnaire for assessing core outcomes in inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 98:148–155
19.
go back to reference Brooks R (1996) EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 37(1):53–72 Brooks R (1996) EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy 37(1):53–72
Metadata
Title
Reliability and validity of the cross-culturally adapted French version of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) in patients with low back pain
Authors
Stéphane Genevay
Christine Cedraschi
Marc Marty
Sylvie Rozenberg
Pierre De Goumoëns
Antonio Faundez
Federico Balagué
François Porchet
Anne F. Mannion
Publication date
01-01-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 1/2012
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-1992-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

European Spine Journal 1/2012 Go to the issue