Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the fear avoidance components scale in patients with chronic pain related to musculoskeletal disorders

  • original article
  • Published:
Wiener klinische Wochenschrift Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Background

The fear avoidance components scale (FACS) evaluates patients’ cognitive, emotional and behavioral fear avoidance behavior. The aim of the study was to conduct the cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Turkish version of the FACS.

Methods

A prospective cross-sectional study was carried out with 208 patients (46.2 ± 11.4 years, 116 women, 92 men) diagnosed with chronic pain related to musculoskeletal disorders. Individuals were assessed with FACS, Tampa scale of kinesiophobia (TSK), Beck depression inventory (BDI), Oswestry disability index (ODI), numerical pain scale (NPS), and pain catastrophizing scale (PCS). A total of 70 patients completed the FACS for the second time 3 days later.

Results

Internal consistency of the total score was excellent (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.815). There was a strong correlation between FACS and TSK and PCS (r1 0.555, r2 0.678, p < 0.001). In addition, the relationship between FACS and BDI and NPS was moderate in terms of construct validity (r1 0.357, r2 0.391, p < 0.001). FACS had a two-factor structure, as expected. The test-retest reliability of the FACS was acceptable to excellent (ICC = 0.526–0.971).

Conclusion

The Turkish version of FACS is a valid and reliable questionnaire for patients with chronic pain related to musculoskeletal disorders. The FACS provides a further advantage over identical questionnaires by evaluating cognitive, behavioral and emotional fear avoidance components.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Loeser JD, Melzack R. Pain: an overview. Lancet. 1999;353(9164):1607–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Darnall BD, Carr DB, Schatman ME. Pain psychology and the biopsychosocial model of pain treatment: ethical imperatives and social responsibility. Pain Med. 2017;18(8):1413–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lethem J, Slade P, Troup J, Bentley G. Outline of a fear-avoidance model of exaggerated pain perception—I. Behav Res Ther. 1983;21(4):401–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Leeuw M, Goossens ME, Linton SJ, Crombez G, Boersma K, Vlaeyen JW. The fear-avoidance model of musculoskeletal pain: current state of scientific evidence. J Behav Med. 2007;30(1):77–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Vlaeyen JW, Kole-Snijders AM, Boeren RG, Van Eek H. Fear of movement/(re) injury in chronic low back pain and its relation to behavioral performance. Pain. 1995;62(3):363–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Vlaeyen JW, Linton SJ. Fear-avoidance and its consequences in chronic musculoskeletal pain: a state of the art. Pain. 2000;85(3):317–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Crombez G, Eccleston C, Van Damme S, Vlaeyen JW, Karoly P. Fear-avoidance model of chronic pain: the next generation. Clin J Pain. 2012;28(6):475–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Asmundson GJ, Katz J. Understanding the co-occurrence of anxiety disorders and chronic pain: state-of-the-art. Depress Anxiety. 2009;26(10):888–901.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Holmes MM, Lewith G, Newell D, Field J, Bishop FL. The impact of patient-reported outcome measures in clinical practice for pain: a systematic review. Qual Life Res. 2017;26(2):245–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Neblett R, Mayer TG, Hartzell MM, Williams MJ, Gatchel RJ. The Fear-avoidance components scale (FACS): Development and psychometric evaluation of a new measure of pain-related fear avoidance. Pain Pract. 2016;16(4):435–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Neblett R, Mayer TG, Williams MJ, Asih S, Cuesta-Vargas AI, Hartzell MM, et al. The Fear-Avoidance Components Scale (FACS). Clin J Pain. 2017;33(12):1088–99.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gutiérrez-Sánchez D, Roldán-Jiménez C, Pajares B, Alba E, Cuesta-Vargas AI. Validity and reliability of the Spanish fear-avoidance components scale in breast cancer survivors. Eur J Cancer Care. 2021;30(6):e13506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Knezevic A, Neblett R, Gatchel RJ, Jeremic-Knezevic M, Bugarski-Ignjatovic V, Tomasevic-Todorovic S, et al. Psychometric validation of the Serbian version of the Fear Avoidance Component Scale (FACS). PLoS ONE. 2018;13(9):e204311.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Bid DD, Neblett R, Alagappan TR, Patel CJ, Patel KN, Patel RL, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the Gujarati fear-avoidance components scale. Physiother J Indian Assoc Physiother. 2020;14(2):98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Muniz J, Elosua P, Hambleton RK. International test commission guidelines for test translation and adaptation. Psicothema. 2013;25(2):151–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Granat L, Andersson S, Hadziabdic E, Brännström M, Sandgren A. Translation, adaptation, and validation of the Self-efficacy in Palliative Care scale (SEPC) for use in Swedish healthcare settings. BMC Palliat Care. 2022;21(1):1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. 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. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(5):1147–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Walter S, Eliasziw M, Donner A. Sample size and optimal designs for reliability studies. Statist Med. 1998;17(1):101–10.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Bonett DG. Sample size requirements for estimating intraclass correlations with desired precision. Stat Med. 2002;21(9):1331–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yilmaz O, Yakut Y, Uygur F, Ulug N. Turkish version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia and its test-retest reliability. 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Beck AT, Steer RA, Carbin MG. Psychometric properties of the Beck Depression Inventory: twenty-five years of evaluation. Clin Psychol Rev. 1988;8(1):77–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kapci EG, Uslu R, Turkcapar H, Karaoglan A. Beck Depression Inventory II: evaluation of the psychometric properties and cut-off points in a Turkish adult population. Depress Anxiety. 2008;25(10):E104–E10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Yakut E, Düger T, Öksüz Ç, Yörükan S, Üreten K, Turan D, et al. Validation of the Turkish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Spine. 2004;29(5):581–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Jensen MP, Turner JA, Romano JM, Fisher LD. Comparative reliability and validity of chronic pain intensity measures. Pain. 1999;83(2):157–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Sullivan MJ, Bishop SR, Pivik J. The pain catastrophizing scale: development and validation. Psychol Assess. 1995;7(4):524.

  27. Ugurlu M, Karakas Ugurlu G, Erten S, Caykoylu A. Validity of Turkish form of Pain Catastrophizing Scale and modeling of the relationship between pain-related disability with pain intensity, cognitive, and emotional factors. Psychiatry Clin Psychopharmacol. 2017;27(2):189–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Perinetti G, StaTips Part IV. Selection, interpretation and reporting of the intraclass correlation coefficient. South Eur J Orthod Dentofac Res. 2018;5(1):3–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Juniper EF. Health-related quality of life in asthma. Curr Opin Pulm Med. 1999;5(2):105.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Costello AB, Osborne J. Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Pract Assess Res Eval. 2005;10(1):7.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Cuesta-Vargas AI, Neblett R, Gatchel RJ, Roldán-Jiménez C. Cross-cultural adaptation and validity of the Spanish fear-avoidance components scale and clinical implications in primary care. BMC Fam Pract. 2020;21(1):1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10(1):1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors certify that no funding has been received for this study and/or preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey

    Kadir Turan PT, MSc

  2. Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey

    Zübeyir Sarı PT, PhD

  3. Köyceğiz Vocational School of Health Services, Department of Health Care Services, Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Muğla, Turkey

    Fatih Özden PT, PhD

Authors
  1. Kadir Turan PT, MSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zübeyir Sarı PT, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fatih Özden PT, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fatih Özden PT, PhD.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

K. Turan, Z. Sarı and F. Özden declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical standards

The permission for the translation for the Turkish version of the fear avoidance components scale (FACS) was acquired from the developers of the original questionnaire. The study was carried out in accordance with the ethical principles and the Helsinki Declaration. Informed consent of the patients were obtained. The study protocol was approved by the ethics committee of Marmara University (no: 09.2020.823).

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Availability of data and material

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Turan, K., Sarı, Z. & Özden, F. Psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the fear avoidance components scale in patients with chronic pain related to musculoskeletal disorders. Wien Klin Wochenschr 136, 48–54 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-023-02224-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00508-023-02224-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation