RESUMEN
UNLABELLED: Acceptance of chronic pain has become an important concept in understanding and predicting that chronic pain sufferers can remain engaged with meaningful aspects of life. Assessment of acceptance has been facilitated by the development of Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire (CPAQ). In this study, we aimed to test the reliability and validity of translated Chinese version of CPAQ to use this important tool in the future management of Hong Kong Chinese patients with chronic nonmalignant pain. Content validity was established by consensus formed among a panel of 5 experts in clinical psychology and pain specialty during the process of forward and backward translations. Test-retest reliability was examined by completing the Chinese CPAQ twice, 2 weeks apart, by 54 patients. A total of 224 Chinese patients with chronic nonmalignant pain attending our cluster multidisciplinary pain clinic were asked to complete a battery of psychometric instruments in Chinese, including an intake form for demographic data, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Score (HADS), Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36 (SF-36), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), and Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ). Analysis results showed that Chinese CPAQ had good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.79) and internal consistency reliability (Cronbach alpha = 0.79). The Chinese CPAQ score was significantly correlated to anxiety, depression, pain catastrophizing, pain self-efficacy, and physical and psychosocial disability. Scree plot and Principal Components Factor analysis confirmed the same 2-factor construct as the original English CPAQ. Construct validity of the Chinese CPAQ can therefore be supported. In conclusion, the Chinese CPAQ is a reliable clinical assessment tool with valid construct for acceptance measurement in our heterogeneous Chinese patients sample with chronic nonmalignant pain. PERSPECTIVE: This article confirms the reliability and validity of a Chinese version of the CPAQ. The Chinese CPAQ can then be used by pain clinicians caring for Chinese chronic pain patients worldwide for acceptance-based psychometric assessment as well as therapies.
Asunto(s)
Pueblo Asiatico/psicología , Dimensión del Dolor/métodos , Dolor/psicología , Encuestas y Cuestionarios/normas , Actividades Cotidianas/psicología , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Análisis de Varianza , Enfermedad Crónica , Comparación Transcultural , Femenino , Hong Kong/epidemiología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Dolor/etnología , Análisis de Componente Principal , Psicometría/métodos , Calidad de Vida/psicología , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Índice de Severidad de la EnfermedadRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to examine the psychometric properties of a Chinese translation of the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (HK-PCS). DESIGN/PATIENTS: Patients aged 18-79 years (N = 130) with chronic nonmalignant pain attending an outpatient multidisciplinary pain center in Hong Kong participated in this cross-sectional study. METHOD: Subjects completed a set of health-related instruments: HK-PCS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, SF-36 Health Survey, and a general demographic questionnaire. Data were analyzed for the distribution, internal consistency, reliability, and construct validity. RESULTS: A satisfactory internal consistency was found (alpha = 0.927). The item-total correlation coefficients ranged from 0.575 to 0.777. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.969 for the total HK-PCS score, 0.956 for helplessness, 0.945 for magnification, and 0.910 for rumination. Confirmatory factor analysis verified a second-order factor structure with the comparative fit index = 1.00, root mean square error of approximation = 0.038, and normed fit index = 0.99 (chi(2) ((58)) = 68.84, P = 0.16). Significant correlations were found for pain intensity, disability, anxiety, and depression (r = 0.223-0.597, P < 0.01). The general health, social function, role emotional, and mental health domains of the SF-36 consistently demonstrated negative association with catastrophizing across all HK-PCS scores (r =-0.279 to -0.396, P < 0.01). No gender difference was noted for HK-PCS scores (P > 0.05), which is contrary to the existing literature. CONCLUSION: This study has illustrated satisfactory psychometric properties of the HK-PCS. We provide evidence for the validity and reliability of the HK-PCS as an instrument for measuring pain catastrophizing in the Chinese patient with chronic pain.