Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of a Brazilian Portuguese version of the chronic pain grade
- 168 Downloads
To verify the reliability and validity of a Brazilian Portuguese version of the chronic pain grade (CPG-Br).
Cultural adaptation was made in accordance with established guidelines, with modifications aiming at improving this process. Adaptations were made based on interviews with 45 chronic pain patients from São Paulo city. Validation was studied by concurrent application of the short-form-36 health survey (SF-36) and other questionnaires to 283 participants with chronic pain from the general population. Temporal stability was verified by a second application to 131 individuals.
Factor analysis resulted in a two-factor solution with factors named characteristic pain intensity and activity limitation due to pain. Alpha coefficients of 0.78 and 0.70 and intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.76 and 0.72 for each factor indicated good internal consistency and temporal stability. Significant correlations between CPG-Br and SF-36, Roland-Morris disability questionnaire and neck disability index scores were noted. A consistent linear trend was also observed between pain grades and SF-36 scores. Frequency of use of pain medications and of pain-related medical visits increased with pain grade.
This Brazilian Portuguese version of the chronic pain grade, tested on a sample of the Brazilian population, demonstrated good reliability and validity.
KeywordsPain Pain measurement Quality of life Validation studies Cross-cultural comparison Scales
We are grateful to Dr Michael Von Korff for his assistance with the use of the Chronic Pain Grade and suggestions for the methodology of this study. ESB Bracher was supported by scholarships from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (Brazil—CNPq) and Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (Brazil—Capes).
- 5.Moore, R., & Brødsgaard, I. (1999). Cross-cultural investigations of pain. In I. K. Crombie, P. R. Croft, S. J. Linton, L. LeResche, & M. Von Korff (Eds.), Epidemiology of pain (pp. 53–79). Seattle: International Association for the Study of Pain.Google Scholar
- 18.Ciconelli, R. M., Ferraz, M. B., Santos, W., Meinão, I., & Quaresma, M. R. (1999). Brazilian-Portuguese version of the SF-36. A reliable and valid quality of life outcome measure. Revista Brasileira de Reumatologia, 39, 143–150.Google Scholar
- 21.Pett, M. A., Lackey, N. R., & Sullivan, J. J. (2003). Rotating the factors. In M. A. Pett, N. R. Lackey, & J. J. Sullivan (Eds.), Making sense of factor analysis (pp. 131–166). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
- 26.Ware, J. E., Kosinski, M., Gandek, B., Aaronson, N. K., Apolone, G., Bech, P., et al. (1998). The factor structure of the SF-36 Health Survey in 10 countries: results from the IQOLA Project. International Quality of Life Assessment. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 51, 1159–1165.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar