Skip to main content

A validation study of the Iranian version of STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) in lumbar central canal stenosis patients

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to translate and validate the STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) in Iran.

Methods

This was a prospective clinical validation study. The translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the original questionnaire was performed, and a total of 269 patients with lumbar central canal stenosis were asked to respond to the questionnaire at their first visits. Patients also were asked to complete the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Reliability was assessed by internal consistency using the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. Validity was evaluated by performing convergent validity and responsiveness to change.

Results

Mean patient age was 58.6 [standard deviation (SD) = 10.9] years; 56.5 % were women. According to patients’ imaging, they were diagnosed as grade 1 (n = 86), grade 2 (n = 107), and grade 3 (n = 76). In general, the SBST showed good psychometric properties. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for overall scale (Q1–Q9) and psychosocial subscale (Q5–Q9) was 0.82 and 0.79, respectively. The ODI correlated strongly with overall SBST scores, lending support to its good convergent validity (r = 0.81; P < 0.001). Responsiveness to change also indicated desirable results.

Conclusion

In general, the Iranian version of the SBST performed well, and findings suggest that it is a reliable and valid measure for screening low back pain in patients with lumbar central canal stenosis in primary care settings.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. 1.

    O’Leary CB, Cahill CR, Robinson AW, Barnes MJ, Hong J. A systematic review: the effects of podiatrical deviations on nonspecific chronic low back pain. J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2013;26:117–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Gevirtz C. Update on treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis. Part 1: defining the problem, diagnosis, and appropriate imaging. Topics Pain Management. 2010;25:1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Airaksinen O, Brox JI, Cedraschi C, Hildebrandt J, Klaber-Moffett J, Kovacs F, Mannion AF, Reis S, Staal JB, Ursin H, Zanoli G. Chapter 4. European guidelines for the management of chronic nonspecific low back pain. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(Suppl 2):S192–300.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Dunn KM, Lewis M, Mullis R, Hill J, Main CJ, Hay EM. STarT Back––development of a low back pain screening tool. Rheumatology. 2005;44:i85.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Hill JC, Dunn KM, Mullis R, Lewis M, Main CJ, Hay EM. Validation of a new low back pain sub-grouping tool for primary care (The STarT Back Tool). Rheumatology. 2006;45:i119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Hill JC, Dunn KM, Lewis M, Mullis R, Main CJ, Foster NE, Hay EM. A primary care back pain screening tool: identifying patient subgroups for initial treatment. Arthr Care Res. 2008;59:632–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Gusi N, del Pozo-Cruz B, Olivares PR, Hernández-Mocholi M, Hill JC. The Spanish version of the “STarT Back Screening Tool” (SBST) in different subgroups. Aten Primaria. 2011;43:356–61.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Bruyère O, Demoulin M, Brereton C, Humblet F, Flynn D, Hill JC, Maquet D, Beveren JV, Reginster JY, Crielaard JM, Demoulin C. Translation validation of a new back pain screening questionnaire (the STarT Back Screening Tool) in French. Arch Public Heal. 2012;70:12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Morsø L, Albert H, Kent P, Manniche C, Hill J. Translation and discriminative validation of the STarT Back Screening Tool into Danish. Eur Spine J. 2011;20:2166–73.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Keele university, STarT Back Screening Tool Website [http://www.keele.ac.uk/sbst/translatedversions/].

  11. 11.

    Keele university, STarT Back Screening Tool Website [http://www.keele.ac.uk/sbst/researcharticles/].

  12. 12.

    Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25:3186–91.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    WHO: Process of translation and adaptation of instruments. [http://www.who.int/substance_abuse/research_tools/translation/en/].

  14. 14.

    Bulliger M, Alonso J, Apolone G. Translating health status questionnaire and evaluating their quality: the IQOLA project approach. J Clin Epidemol. 1998;9:13–23.

    Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Mousavi SJ, Parnianpour M, Mehdian H, Montazeri A, Mobini B. The Oswestry Disability Index, the Roland–Morris Disability questionnaire, and the Quebec back pain disability scale: translation and validation studies of the Iranian versions. Spine. 2006;31:454–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Nunnally JC, Bernstien IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Kirkwood BR, Sterne JAC. Essential medical statistics. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.; 2004. p. 430–1.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank the staff of the Neurosurgery Unit at Imam-Hossain Hospital, Tehran, Iran.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Parisa Azimi.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 45 kb)

About this article

Cite this article

Azimi, P., Shahzadi, S., Azhari, S. et al. A validation study of the Iranian version of STarT Back Screening Tool (SBST) in lumbar central canal stenosis patients. J Orthop Sci 19, 213–217 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-013-0506-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Oswestry Disability Index
  • Pain Catastrophizing Scale
  • Iranian Version
  • Persian Version
  • Good Convergent Validity