Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

, Volume 24, Issue 1, pp 139–145 | Cite as

Validation of the Chinese Version of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire

  • Yi-Jing Lue
  • Yen-Mou Lu
  • Gau-Tyan Lin
  • Ya-Fen LiuEmail author


Purpose Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is a common diagnosis occurring in the workplace when people experience hand or wrist symptoms and difficulty performing activities. This study aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) used to evaluate patients with CTS. Methods A convenience sample of patients with CTS was recruited from two hospitals. The Symptom Severity Scale (SSS) and Functional Status Scale (FSS) of the BCTQ were used to assess symptoms and functional status. Test–retest reliability within 1 week was evaluated (n = 51). Construct validity was assessed by examining the relationship between the BCTQ and other well known measures (n = 99). Responsiveness of the scale was examined pre- and post-operatively for patients undergoing carpal tunnel surgery (n = 23). Results High reliability was demonstrated through intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.81 and 0.83 for SSS and FSS, respectively. The minimal detectable change was 0.86 and 0.75 for SSS and FSS, respectively. Convergent validity was supported by high correlation of both scales with Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (|rho| = 0.63, 0.75 for SSS and FSS), and moderate to high correlation with the subscales of the Short-Form 36 for SSS(|rho| = 0.72 for Body Pain) and FSS (|rho| = 0.48 for Physical Function). Responsiveness was confirmed by moderate to high standardized response means for SSS (1.03) and FSS (0.62). Conclusion The Chinese BCTQ is a reliable, valid and responsive disease-specific measure for assessment of symptoms and functional status in patients with CTS.


Carpal tunnel syndrome Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire Reliability Validity Responsiveness 



We are most grateful to the study participants for their contribution to this study. This study was supported by grants from the Kaohsiung Municipal Hsiao-Kang Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University (kmhk-96-022).


  1. 1.
    Werner RA. Evaluation of work-related carpal tunnel syndrome. J Occup Rehabil. 2006;16:207–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Barcenilla A, March LM, Chen JS, Sambrook PN. Carpal tunnel syndrome and its relationship to occupation: a meta-analysis. Rheumatology. 2012;51:250–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonfiglioli R, Mattioli S, Fiorentini C, Graziosi F, Curti S, Violante F. Relationship between repetitive work and the prevalence of carpal tunnel syndrome in part-time and full-time female supermarket cashiers: a quasi-experimental study. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2007;80:248–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Luckhaupt SE, Dahlhamer JM, Ward BW, Sweeney MH, Sestito JP, Calvert GM. Prevalence and work-relatedness of carpal tunnel syndrome in the working population, United States, 2010 national health interview survey. Am J Ind Med. 2012. doi: 10.1002/ajim.22048.
  5. 5.
    United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. Days away from work highest for carpal tunnel syndrome. In: The Editor’s Desk. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. (2001). Accessed 12 Dec 2012.
  6. 6.
    Feuerstein M, Miller VL, Burrell LM, Berger R. Occupational upper extremity disorders in the federal workforce. Prevalence, health care expenditures, and patterns of work disability. J Occup Environ Med. 1998;40:546–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Levine DW, Simmons BP, Koris MJ, Daltroy LH, Hohl GG, Fossel AH, Katz JN. A self-administered questionnaire for the assessment of severity of symptoms and functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75:1585–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Katz JN, Punnett L, Simmons BP, Fossel AH, Mooney N, Keller RB. Workers’ compensation recipients with carpal tunnel syndrome: the validity of self-reported health measures. Am J Public Health. 1996;86:52–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Leite JC, Jerosch-Herold C, Song F. A systematic review of the psychometric properties of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2006;7:78–86.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sambandam SN, Priyanka P, Gul A, Ilango B. Critical analysis of outcome measures used in the assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Int Orthop. 2008;32:497–504.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sezgin M, Incel NA, Serhan S, Camdeviren H, As I, Erdoğan C. Assessment of symptom severity and functional status in patients with carpal tunnel syndrome: reliability and functionality of the Turkish version of the Boston Questionnaire. Disabil Rehabil. 2006;28:1281–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Campos CC, Manzano GM, de Andrade LB, Castelo Filho A, Nóbrega JA. Translation and validation of an instrument for evaluation of severity of symptoms and the functional status in carpal tunnel syndrome. Arq Neuropsiquiatr. 2003;61:51–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rosales RS, Delgado EB, Diez de la Lastra-Bosch I. Evaluation of the Spanish version of the DASH and carpal tunnel syndrome health-related quality-of-life instruments: cross-cultural adaptation process and reliability. J Hand Surg Am. 2002;27:334–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Atroshi I, Johnsson R, Sprinchorn A. Self-administered outcome instrument in carpal tunnel syndrome. Reliability, validity and responsiveness evaluated in 102 patients. Acta Orthop Scand. 1998;69:82–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liu YF, Lin GT, Lu YM, Fu YC, Lue YJ. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Chinese version of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. FJPT. 2008;33:75–85.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hopkins WG. Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Med. 2000;30:1–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lu YM, Lin JH, Hsiao SF, Liu MF, Chen SM, Lue YJ. The relative and absolute reliability of leg muscle strength testing by a handheld dynamometer. J Strength Cond Res. 2011;25:1065–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C. Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand). The Upper Extremity Collaborative Group (UECG). Am J Ind Med. 1996;29:602–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Liang HW, Wang HK, Yao G, Horng YS, Hou SM. Psychometric evaluation of the Taiwan version of the Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire. J Formos Med Assoc. 2004;103:773–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ware JE Jr. Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care. 1992;30:473–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lu JR, Tseng HM, Tsai YJ. Assessment of health-related quality of life in Taiwan (I): development and psychometric testing of SF-36 Taiwan version. Taiwan J Public Health. 2003;22:501–11.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Carod-Artal FJ, Coral LF, Trizotto DS, Moreira CM. The stroke impact Scale 3.0: evaluation of acceptability, reliability, and validity of the Brazilian version. Stroke. 2008;39:2477–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lamping DL, Schroter S, Marquis P, Marrel A, Duprat-Lomon I, Sagnier PP. The community-acquired pneumonia symptom questionnaire: a new, patent-based outcome measure to evaluate symptoms in patients with community-acquired pneumonia. Chest. 2002;122:920–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:34–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    McHorney CA, Tarlov AR. Individual patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res. 1995;4:293–307.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: Wiley; 1981.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cohen J. A power primer. Psychol Bull. 1992;112:155–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Greenslade JR, Mehta RL, Belward P, Warwick DJ. DASH and Boston Questionnaire assessment of carpal tunnel syndrome outcome: what is the responsiveness of an outcome questionnaire? J Hand Surg Br. 2004;29:159–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gelfman R, Melton LJ 3rd, Yawn BP, Wollan PC, Amadio PC, Stevens JC. Long-term trends in carpal tunnel syndrome. Neurology. 2009;72:33–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Andresen EM. Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2000;81:S15–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Andresen EM, Rothenberg BM, Panzer R, Katz P, McDermott MP. Selecting a generic measure of health-related quality of life for used among older adults. A comparison of candidate instruments. Eval Health Prof. 1998;21:244–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gay RE, Amadio PC, Johnson JC. Comparative responsiveness of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, the Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire, and the SF-36 to clinical change after carpal tunnel release. J Hand Surg Am. 2003;28:250–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Amadio PC, Silverstein MD, Ilstrup DM, Schleck CD, Jensen LM. Outcome assessment for carpal tunnel surgery: the relative responsiveness of generic, arthritis-specific disease-specific, and physical examination measures. J Hand Surg Am. 1996;21:338–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yi-Jing Lue
    • 1
    • 2
  • Yen-Mou Lu
    • 3
    • 4
  • Gau-Tyan Lin
    • 3
    • 5
  • Ya-Fen Liu
    • 6
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Physical Therapy, College of Health SciencesKaohsiung Medical UniversityKaohsiungTaiwan
  2. 2.Department of Neurology Master’s Program, School of Medicine, College of MedicineKaohsiung Medical UniversityKaohsiungTaiwan
  3. 3.Department of OrthopaedicsKaohsiung Medical University HospitalKaohsiungTaiwan
  4. 4.Department of Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, College of MedicineKaohsiung Medical UniversityKaohsiungTaiwan
  5. 5.Graduate Institute of Medicine, College of MedicineKaohsiung Medical UniversityKaohsiungTaiwan
  6. 6.Department of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationKaohsiung Municipal Hsiao-Kang Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical UniversityHsiaogang, KaohsiungTaiwan

Personalised recommendations