Assessment of the impact of pain on work productivity: validation of the Spanish WPAI:Pain questionnaire
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23938/S1137-6627/2016000100009Keywords:
Dolor, Diseño de cuestionario, Validación, FiabilidadAbstract
Background. Health measuring instruments are essential in daily clinical practice. However, a validation process is needed in order to certify the validity and reliability of it. The aim of our study is to validate a questionnaire to assess the consequences of pain in work productivity.
Methods. Based on the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire - General Health we have created a modified version called WPAI:Pain in order to be able to measure the consequences of pain in work productivity. The study was conducted following the usual guidelines of test validation, omitting face validity as WPAI:Pain is a modification of an existing questionnaire. Validity and reliability were calculated.
Results. A total of 577 questionnaires were obtained in 2 spanish university hospitals. The questionnaire’s discriminating power was verified by Mann-Whitney test. Reliability tests were realized, Cronbach's alpha was 0.896 and Guttman split-half was 0.921. Stability was evaluated with a test-retest which was significant. Construct validity was established by Pearson correlation comparing the results of the questionnaire with the pain visual analog scale, which was statistically significant for all values.
Conclusions. The WPAI:Pain questionnaire is a valid instrument for measuring the consequences of pain in work productivity. It is currently the only one validated in Spanish. Major studies are needed in order to establish its universal validity.
Keywords. Pain. Questionnaire design. Validation. Reliability.
Downloads
References
1. BASSOLS A, BOSCH F, CAMPILLO M, CANELLAS M, BANOS, J.E. An epidemiological comparison of pain complaints in the general population of Catalonia (Spain). Pain 1999; 83: 9-16.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3959(99)00069-X
2. ELLIOTT AM, SMITH BH, HANNAFORD PC, SMITH WC, CHAMBERS WA. The course of chronic pain in the community: results of a 4-year follow-up study. Pain 2002; 99: 299-307.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3959(02)00138-0
3. ELLIOTT AM, SMITH BH, PENNY KI, CAIRNS SMITH W, ALASTAIR CHAMBERS W. The epidemiology of chronic pain in the community. Lancet 1999; 354: 1248-1252.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)03057-3
4. LANGLEY PC, RUIZ-IBAN MA, MOLINA JT, DE ANDRES J, CASTELLON JR. The prevalence, correlates and treatment of pain in Spain. J Med Econ 2011; 14: 367-380.
https://doi.org/10.3111/13696998.2011.583303
5. SMITH BH, ELLIOTT AM, CHAMBERS WA, SMITH WC, HANNAFORD PC, PENNY K et al. The impact of chronic pain in the community. Fam Pract 2001; 18: 292-299.
https://doi.org/10.1093/fampra/18.3.292
6. ZHANG W, GIGNAC MA, BEATON D, TANG K, ANIS AH. Productivity loss due to presenteeism among patients with arthritis: estimates from 4 instruments. J Rheumatol 2010; 37: 1805-1814.
https://doi.org/10.3899/jrheum.100123
7. TORRALBA A, MIQUEL A, DARBA J. Situación actual del dolor crónico en España: iniciativa "Pain Proposal". Rev Soc Esp Dolor 2014; 21: 16-22.
https://doi.org/10.4321/S1134-80462014000100003
8. BADIA X, MURIEL C, GRACIA A, NUNEZ-OLARTE JM, PERULERO N, GALVEZ R et al. Validación española del cuestionario Brief Pain Inventory en pacientes con dolor de causa neoplásica. Med Clin (Barc) 2003; 120: 52-59.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-7753(03)73601-X
9. LAZARO C, CASERAS X, WHIZAR-LUGO VM, WENK R, BALDIOCEDA F, BERNAL R et al. Psychometric properties of a Spanish version of the McGill Pain Questionnaire in several Spanish-speaking countries. Clin J Pain 2001; 17: 365-374.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00002508-200112000-00012
10. MASEDO AI, ESTEVE R. Some empirical evidence regarding the validity of the Spanish version of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ-SV). Pain 2000; 85: 451-456.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3959(99)00300-0
11. MELZACK R. The McGill Pain Questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods. Pain 1975; 1: 277-299.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(75)90044-5
12. RUIZ LOPEZ, R, PAGEROLS BONILLA M, FERRER MARRADES I, COLLADO CRUZ A. El lenguaje del dolor. Med Clin (Barc) 1991; 96: 196.
13. GONZÁLEZ-ESCALADA J, CAMBA A, MURIEL C, RODRÍGUEZ MJ, CONTRERAS D, DE BARUTELL C et al. Validación del índice de Lattinen para la evaluación del paciente con dolor crónico. Rev Soc Esp Dolor 2012; 19: 181-188.
14. ROLAND M, FAIRBANK J, The Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire. Spine 2000; 25: 3115-3124.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00006
15. IDOATE GARCIA VM. La utilizacion de los cuestionarios para la valoracion psicosocial de las lumbalgias. An Sist Sanit Navar 1997; 20: 337-345.
16. KUORINKA I, JONSSON B, KILBOM A, VINTERBERG H, BIERING-SORENSEN F, ANDERSSON G et al. Standardised Nordic questionnaires for the analysis of musculoskeletal symptoms. Appl Ergon 1987; 18: 233-237.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(87)90010-X
17. REILLY MC, ZBROZEK AS, DUKES EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. Pharmacoeconomics 1993; 4: 353-365.
https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199304050-00006
18. GAWLICKI MC, REILLY MC, POPIELNICKI A, REILLY K. Linguistic validation of the US Spanish work productivity and activity impairment questionnaire, general health version. Value Health 2006; 9: 199-204.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00101.x
19. WPAI:SHP. [cited 2015 Web Page]; Available from: http://www.reillyassociates.net/WPAI_SHP.html.
20. WPAI - Scoring. [cited 2015 Web Page]; Available from: http://www.reillyassociates.net/WPAI_Scoring.html.
21. CICONELLI RM, SOAREZ PC, KOWALSKI CC, FERRAZ MB. The Brazilian Portuguese version of the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: General Health (WPAI-GH) Questionnaire. Sao Paulo Med J 2006; 124: 325-332.
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-31802006000600005
22. BAILE JI, GUILLEN GRIMA F, GARRIDO LANDIVAR E. Desarrollo y validación de una escala de insatisfacción corporal para adolescentes. Med Clin (Barc) 2003; 121: 173-177.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0025-7753(03)73893-7
23. CARVAJAL A, CENTENO C, WATSON R, MARTINEZ M, RUBIALES AS. ¿Cómo validar un instrumento de medida de la salud? An Sist Sanit Navar 2011; 34: 63-72.
https://doi.org/10.4321/S1137-66272011000100007
24. PEREZ-CIORDIA I, GUILLEN-GRIMA F, BRUGOS LARUMBE A, AGUINAGA ONTOSO I, Validación de un cuestionario de mejora de la satisfacción laboral (CMSL) en profesionales de atención primaria. An Sist Sanit Navar 2012; 35: 413-423.
https://doi.org/10.4321/S1137-66272012000300007
25. RATTRAY J, JONES M.C, Essential elements of questionnaire design and development. J Clin Nurs 2007; 16: 234-243.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2702.2006.01573.x
26. WPAI - Coding. [cited 2015 Web Page]; Available from: http://www.reillyassociates.net/WPAI_Coding.html.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
La revista Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra es publicada por el Departamento de Salud del Gobierno de Navarra (España), quien conserva los derechos patrimoniales (copyright ) sobre el artículo publicado y favorece y permite la difusión del mismo bajo licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-SA 4.0). Esta licencia permite copiar, usar, difundir, transmitir y exponer públicamente el artículo, siempre que siempre que se cite la autoría y la publicación inicial en Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra, y se distinga la existencia de esta licencia de uso.
