Psychometric Properties of the Persian Version of the ID-Pain Questionnaire

Document Type : RESEARCH PAPER

Authors

1 Occupational Therapy Department, University of Social Welfare and Rehabilitation Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 School of Physical Therapy, Department of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Western Ontario, Canada

Abstract

Background: The Identification Pain questionnaire (IDPQ) is one of the recommended tools by the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group of the International Association for the Study of Pain for neuropathic pain screening. This study aimed to translate, cross-culturally adapt, and validate the Persian version of the IDPQ. Methods: First, the IDPQ was translated based on the recommended guidelines. Afterward, the internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient), test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient), construct validity (compared to the Douleur Neuropathique 4 [DN4] questionnaire), and discriminant validity (Receiver operating curve analysis) of the IDPQ-P were evaluated. A total of 90 patients with neuropathic (n=50) and nociceptive pain (n=40) were enrolled in the study. In the next 72 h after the initial assessment, 30 patients (15 with neuropathic and 15 with nociceptive pain) completed the IDPQ-P. Results: No modifications were needed in the process of translation and cultural adaptation. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was obtained at 0.47 for all patients, indicating poor internal consistency. The intraclass correlation coefficient was estimated at 0.97, showing excellent test-retest reliability. A high correlation was found between the DN4 questionnaire and IDPQ-P (0.74), showing acceptable construct validity. The area under the curve was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.88-0.99) and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.85-0.99) when the physician’s diagnosis and the DN4 cut-off value were used as the reference standard, respectively. The optimal cut-off value of ≥ 2 demonstrated the highest sensitivity (98%) and specificity (79%). Conclusion: The IDPQ-P can be used in the clinical setting as an accurate and quick screening tool to diagnose patients with neuropathic pain. Sufficient test-retest reliability, construct validity, discriminant validity, and high diagnostic accuracy were found for the IDPQ-P. Level of evidence: I

Keywords

References

1. Gilron I, Baron R, Jensen T. Neuropathic pain: principles of 
diagnosis and treatment. InMayo Clinic Proceedings 2015 
(Vol. 90, No. 4, pp. 532-545). Elsevier.
2. Colloca L, Ludman T, Bouhassira D, Baron R, Dickenson AH, 
Yarnitsky D, et al. Neuropathic pain. Nature reviews Disease 
primers. 2017;3(1):1-9.
3. Portenoy R, ID Pain Steering Committee. Development and 
testing of a neuropathic pain screening questionnaire: ID 
Pain. Current medical research and opinion. 
2006;22(8):1555-65.
4. Mathieson S, Maher CG, Terwee CB, De Campos TF, Lin CW. 
Neuropathic pain screening questionnaires have limited measurement properties. A systematic review. Journal of 
clinical epidemiology. 2015;68(8):957-66.
5. Abu-Shaheen A, Yousef S, Riaz M, Nofal A, Khan S, Heena H. 
Validity and reliability of Arabic version of the ID Pain 
screening questionnaire in the assessment of neuropathic 
pain. Plos one. 2018;13(3):e0192307..
6. Padua L, Briani C, Truini A, Aprile I, Bouhassirà D, Cruccu G, 
et al. Consistence and discrepancy of neuropathic pain 
screening tools DN4 and ID-Pain. Neurol Sci. 2013; 
34(3):373-7.
7. Jun L, Yi F, Jisheng HJ. Linguistic adaptation, validation and 
comparison of 3 routinely used neuropathic pain 
questionnaires. Pain Physician. 2012;15:179-86.
8. Chan A, Wong S, Chen P, Tsoi T, Lam J, Ip W, et al. Validation 
study of the Chinese Identification Pain Questionnaire for 
neuropathic pain. Hong Kong Med J. 2011;17(4):297-300.
9. Kitisomprayoonkul W. Validation study of the Thai ID pain 
scale. Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand. 
2011;94(5):610.
10. Yang CC, Ro LS, Tsai YC, Lin KP, Sun WZ, Fang WT, et al. 
Development and validation of a Taiwan version of the ID 
Pain questionnaire (ID Pain-T). Journal of the Chinese 
Medical Association. 2018;81(1):12-7.
11. Galvez R, Pardo A, Ceron JM, Villasante F, Aranguren JL, 
Saldana MT, et al. Linguistic adaptation into Spanish and 
psychometric validation of the ID-Pain questionnaire for the 
screening of neuropathic pain. Medicina clinica. 
2008;131(15):572-8.
12. Uzunkulaoğlu A, Kerim D, Saime AY, Ergin S. Validity and 
reliability of Turkish version of the identification pain 
questionnaire in the assessment of neuropathic pain. 
Archives of rheumatology. 2019;34(3):262.
13. Salman Roghani R, Delbari A, Asadi-Lari M, Rashedi V. 
Neuropathic pain prevalence of older adults in an urban area 
of Iran: a population-based study. Pain research and 
treatment. 2019;2019.
14. Madani SP, Fateh HR, Forogh B, Fereshtehnejad SM, Ahadi T, 
Ghaboussi P, et al. Validity and reliability of the persian 
(farsi) version of the DN 4 (douleur neuropathique 4 
questions) questionnaire for differential diagnosis of 
neuropathic from non‐neuropathic pains. Pain Practice. 
2014;14(5):427-36.
15. Spallone V, Morganti R, D’amato C, Greco C, Cacciotti L, Marfia 
GA. Validation of DN4 as a screening tool for neuropathic 
pain in painful diabetic polyneuropathy. Diabetic Medicine. 
2012;29(5):578-85.
16. Kamper SJ, Maher CG, Mackay G. Global rating of change 
scales: a review of strengths and weaknesses and 
considerations for design. Journal of Manual & Manipulative 
Therapy. 2009;17(3):163-70.
17. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines 
for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report 
measures. Spine. 2000;25(24):3186-91.
18. Tavakol M, Dennick RJIjome. Making sense of Cronbach's 
alpha. Int J Med Educ 2011;2:53.
19. Prinsen CA, Mokkink LB, Bouter LM, Alonso J, Patrick DL, De 
Vet HC, et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of 
patient-reported outcome measures. Quality of Life 
Research. 2018;27(5):1147-57.
20. Bosco FA, Aguinis H, Singh K, Field JG, Pierce CA. 
Correlational effect size benchmarks. Journal of Applied 
Psychology. 2015;100(2):431.
21. Kumar R, Indrayan A. Receiver operating characteristic 
(ROC) curve for medical researchers. Indian pediatrics. 
2011;48(4):277-87.
22. Youden WJJC. Index for rating diagnostic tests. Cancer. 
1950;3(1):32-5.
23. Haanpää M, Attal N, Backonja M, Baron R, Bennett M, 
Bouhassira D, et al. NeuPSIG guidelines on neuropathic pain 
assessment. PAIN®. 2011;152(1):14-27.
24. Kopalle PK, Lehmann DR. Alpha inflation? The impact of 
eliminating scale items on Cronbach's alpha. Organizational 
Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 1997;70(3):189-
97.
25. Shafiee E, Farzad M, Karbalaei M. A systematic review of selfreported outcome measures assessing disability following 
hand and upper extremity conditions in Persian population. 
Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2021;9(2):141.
I: 10.22038/ABJS.2020.48859.2423.
The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery
Volume 10, Issue 2
February 2022
Pages 213-218

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 08 November 2020
  • Revise Date: 03 February 2021
  • Accept Date: 03 April 2021

Share

How to cite

Statistics