Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To compare the quality of the measurement properties of Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PSEQ)-10, PSEQ-4, PSEQ-2, Chronic Pain Self-Efficacy Scale (CPSS) long-form, and CPSS short-form (CPSS-SF) in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP).
METHODS: Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies (measurement properties).
METHODS: Outpatient rehabilitation.
METHODS: Participants (N=245) with nonspecific CLBP (18-60y, 63% women) were enrolled in this study.
METHODS: Not applicable.
METHODS: Pain self-efficacy questionnaires were administered on 3 occasions: baseline assessment, 1 week after the first assessment (reliability), and after an 8-week exercise program (responsiveness). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach α were used to assess reliability and internal consistency, respectively. Pearson correlation and confirmatory factor analyses were used to assess construct validity. The area under the curve and hypothesis testing were used to assess responsiveness.
RESULTS: No difference was observed for all the questionnaires regarding internal consistency (Cronbach α>.7), criterion validity (r>.88), and reliability (ICC>.7). The scales confirmed >75% of the hypotheses for the construct validity, except for CPSS-SF. PSEQ-2 did not meet the criterion for structural validity. PSEQ-10 met all the criteria for good measurement properties according to Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments.
CONCLUSIONS: It was not possible to calculate structural validity for PSEQ-2, CPSS-SF did not meet the criterion for suitable hypothesis testing for construct validity, and all the questionnaires did not show suitable measurement error, except for the PSEQ-10. Hence, the PSEQ-10 was the unique scale that met all the criteria for good measurement properties for assessing pain self-efficacy in CLBP.
METHODS: Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies (measurement properties).
METHODS: Outpatient rehabilitation.
METHODS: Participants (N=245) with nonspecific CLBP (18-60y, 63% women) were enrolled in this study.
METHODS: Not applicable.
METHODS: Pain self-efficacy questionnaires were administered on 3 occasions: baseline assessment, 1 week after the first assessment (reliability), and after an 8-week exercise program (responsiveness). The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and Cronbach α were used to assess reliability and internal consistency, respectively. Pearson correlation and confirmatory factor analyses were used to assess construct validity. The area under the curve and hypothesis testing were used to assess responsiveness.
RESULTS: No difference was observed for all the questionnaires regarding internal consistency (Cronbach α>.7), criterion validity (r>.88), and reliability (ICC>.7). The scales confirmed >75% of the hypotheses for the construct validity, except for CPSS-SF. PSEQ-2 did not meet the criterion for structural validity. PSEQ-10 met all the criteria for good measurement properties according to Consensus-Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments.
CONCLUSIONS: It was not possible to calculate structural validity for PSEQ-2, CPSS-SF did not meet the criterion for suitable hypothesis testing for construct validity, and all the questionnaires did not show suitable measurement error, except for the PSEQ-10. Hence, the PSEQ-10 was the unique scale that met all the criteria for good measurement properties for assessing pain self-efficacy in CLBP.
摘要：
目的:比较慢性腰痛(CLBP)患者中PSEQ-10、PSEQ-4和PSEQ-2与CPSS(长型:CPSS-LF和短型:CPSS-SF)的测量特性的质量。
方法：横断面和纵向研究（测量特性）设置：门诊康复参与者：245名非特异性CLBP参与者（18岁和60岁，63%的女性）参加了这项研究。
方法：不适用。
方法：疼痛自我效能问卷分三种情况进行：基线评估，第一次评估后一周（可靠性）和八周锻炼计划后（反应性）。使用组内相关系数(ICC)和Cronbach'sα来评估可靠性和内部一致性，分别。采用Pearson相关和验证性因子分析评估结构效度。曲线下面积和假设检验用于评估反应性。
结果：所有关于内部一致性的问卷均无差异（Cronbach'sα>.7），标准效度(r>.88)和信度(ICC>.7)。量表证实了超过75%的结构效度假设，CPSS-SF除外。PSEQ-2不符合结构有效性的标准。PSEQ-10符合根据COSMIN的良好测量特性的所有标准。
结论：无法计算PSEQ-2的结构效度，CPSS-SF不符合适当的假设检验标准的结构效度，并且所有问卷均未显示适当的测量误差，除了PSEQ-10。因此，PSEQ-10是符合评估CLBP疼痛自我效能的良好测量特性的所有标准的独特量表。
方法：横断面和纵向研究（测量特性）设置：门诊康复参与者：245名非特异性CLBP参与者（18岁和60岁，63%的女性）参加了这项研究。
方法：不适用。
方法：疼痛自我效能问卷分三种情况进行：基线评估，第一次评估后一周（可靠性）和八周锻炼计划后（反应性）。使用组内相关系数(ICC)和Cronbach'sα来评估可靠性和内部一致性，分别。采用Pearson相关和验证性因子分析评估结构效度。曲线下面积和假设检验用于评估反应性。
结果：所有关于内部一致性的问卷均无差异（Cronbach'sα>.7），标准效度(r>.88)和信度(ICC>.7)。量表证实了超过75%的结构效度假设，CPSS-SF除外。PSEQ-2不符合结构有效性的标准。PSEQ-10符合根据COSMIN的良好测量特性的所有标准。
结论：无法计算PSEQ-2的结构效度，CPSS-SF不符合适当的假设检验标准的结构效度，并且所有问卷均未显示适当的测量误差，除了PSEQ-10。因此，PSEQ-10是符合评估CLBP疼痛自我效能的良好测量特性的所有标准的独特量表。
