• A S Leung, T H Lam, A J Hedley, and L T Twomey.
• Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
• Spine. 1999 May 15;24(10):961-6.

Study DesignA prospective observational study on the use of the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Disability Scale.ObjectiveTo evaluate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Chinese adaptation of the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale in Chinese patients in Hong Kong who have back pain.Summary Of Background DataFrontline clinicians, researchers, and health care managers in Hong Kong are urgently in need of a Chinese adaptation of a low back pain outcome measure that has been subjected to a rigorous process of psychometric and clinical testing.MethodsFour samples with 473 consecutive adult patients with low back pain from six physiotherapy outpatient departments in Hong Kong who completed the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Scale were observed and measured at time points including the beginning physiotherapy; 10 days, 3 weeks, and 6 weeks after physiotherapy; and when discharged from treatment.ResultsThe test-retest reliability coefficient was 0.94 (0.94 in the original English version; figures from the English version are reported in parentheses). The Cronbach alpha coefficient was 0.85 (0.80). The Spearman correlation coefficient, when the Aberdeen score was correlated with that of a generic current 42-item questionnaire regarding the patient's perceived health to establish cross-sectional construct validity, was 0.59 (0.36-0.66, with the Short Form 36 scale). The effect sizes (responsiveness) at weeks 3 and 6 after treatment began were 0.59 and 0.81, respectively (a high of 0.62 reported in the English version).ConclusionsThe Chinese version of the Aberdeen Low Back Pain Disability Scale retained the high levels of reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the original English version when tested in Hong Kong in four samples of Chinese patients with low back pain.

24 keywords...

hide…