Display options
Cite
Pedersen CK, Danneskiold-Samsøe B, Garrow AP, et al. Development of a danish language version of the manchester foot pain and disability index: reproducibility and construct validity testing. Pain Res Treat. 2013;2013:284903doi: 10.1155/2013/284903.
Pedersen, C. K., Danneskiold-Samsøe, B., Garrow, A. P., Wæhrens, E. E., Bliddal, H., Christensen, R., & Bartels, E. M. (2013). Development of a danish language version of the manchester foot pain and disability index: reproducibility and construct validity testing. Pain research and treatment, 2013284903. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/284903
Pedersen, Christian K, et al. "Development of a danish language version of the manchester foot pain and disability index: reproducibility and construct validity testing." Pain research and treatment vol. 2013 (2013): 284903. doi: https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/284903
Pedersen CK, Danneskiold-Samsøe B, Garrow AP, Wæhrens EE, Bliddal H, Christensen R, Bartels EM. Development of a danish language version of the manchester foot pain and disability index: reproducibility and construct validity testing. Pain Res Treat. 2013;2013:284903. doi: 10.1155/2013/284903. Epub 2013 Mar 06. PMID: 23533748; PMCID: PMC3606795.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Pain Res Treat. 2013;2013:284903. doi: 10.1155/2013/284903. Epub 2013 Mar 06.

Development of a danish language version of the manchester foot pain and disability index: reproducibility and construct validity testing.

Pain research and treatment

Christian K Pedersen, Bente Danneskiold-Samsøe, Adam P Garrow, Eva E Wæhrens, Henning Bliddal, Robin Christensen, Else Marie Bartels

Affiliations

  1. The Parker Institute, Department of Rheumatology, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Nordre Fasanvej 57, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark.

PMID: 23533748 PMCID: PMC3606795 DOI: 10.1155/2013/284903

Abstract

Introduction. The Manchester Foot Pain and Disability Index (MFPDI) is a 19-item questionnaire for the assessment of disability caused by foot pain. The aim was to develop a Danish language version of the MFPDI (MFPDI-DK) and evaluate its reproducibility and construct validity. Methods. A Danish version was created, following a forward-backward translation procedure. A sample of 84 adult patients with foot pain was recruited. Participants completed two copies of the MFPDI-DK within a 24- to 48-hour interval, along with the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36 (SF-36), and a pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Reproducibility was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% limits of agreement (Bland-Altman plot). Construct validity was evaluated with Pearson's Rho, using a priori hypothesized correlations with SF-36 subscales and VASmean. Results. The MFPDI-DK showed very good reliability with an ICC of 0.92 (0.88-0.95). The 95% limits of agreement ranged from -6.03 to 6.03 points. Construct validity was supported by moderate to very strong correlations with the SF-36 physical subscales and VASmean. Conclusion. The MFPDI-DK appears to be a valid and reproducible instrument in evaluating foot-pain-related disability in Danish adult patients in cross-sectional samples. Further research is needed to test the responsiveness of the MFPDI-DK.

References

  1. Foot (Edinb). 2010 Mar;20(1):7-11 - PubMed
  2. Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Oct 1;148(7):657-65 - PubMed
  3. Pain. 2004 Jul;110(1-2):361-8 - PubMed
  4. Value Health. 2005 Mar-Apr;8(2):94-104 - PubMed
  5. Pain. 2000 Mar;85(1-2):107-13 - PubMed
  6. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1987 Jun;77(6):308-11 - PubMed
  7. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006 Jul;45(7):863-7 - PubMed
  8. Br J Psychiatry. 2000 Mar;176:249-52 - PubMed
  9. BMJ. 2008 Jun 28;336(7659):1464-5 - PubMed
  10. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006 Oct;22(10):1911-20 - PubMed
  11. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2001 May;91(5):222-9 - PubMed
  12. J Rheumatol. 2003 Dec;30(12):2689-93 - PubMed
  13. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008 Jun 01;6:39 - PubMed
  14. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2005 Mar;19(2):191-5 - PubMed
  15. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2009 Aug;48(8):992-6 - PubMed
  16. Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307-10 - PubMed
  17. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2000 Sep;90(8):397-402 - PubMed
  18. J Foot Ankle Res. 2009 Oct 30;2:29 - PubMed
  19. Am J Epidemiol. 2004 Mar 1;159(5):491-8 - PubMed
  20. Disabil Rehabil. 2005 Feb 18;27(4):164-9 - PubMed
  21. Pain. 2004 Jul;110(1-2):378-84 - PubMed
  22. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1995 May;43(5):479-84 - PubMed
  23. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998 Nov;51(11):991-9 - PubMed
  24. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Mar 1;27(5):515-22 - PubMed
  25. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010 Mar 18;10:22 - PubMed
  26. Med Care. 2000 Sep;38(9 Suppl):II14-25 - PubMed
  27. Value Health. 2007 Nov-Dec;10 Suppl 2:S125-37 - PubMed
  28. Int J Nurs Stud. 2011 Jun;48(6):661-71 - PubMed
  29. BMJ. 2010 Jan 18;340:c186 - PubMed

Publication Types