Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rasch validation of the Danish version of the shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) in patients with rotator cuff-related disorders

  • Brief Communication
  • Published:
Quality of Life Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The psychometric properties of the shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) have been extensively evaluated using classical test theory, but very few studies have applied Rasch analysis. The purpose of this study was to validate the Danish version using Rasch analysis.

Methods

Responses to the SPADI from 229 patients (48% female, mean age 54.5) were included in the Rasch analysis. Overall fit, individual item fit, local response dependence, dimensionality, targeting, reliability, and differential item functioning (DIF) were examined.

Results

After iterative analyses, good fit to the Rasch model was observed, with acceptable targeting and uni-dimensionality. SPADI should be reported as two separate subscales: Pain and Functional Disability. The pain subscale initially demonstrated misfit due to local dependence and DIF, but a log linear Rasch model showed good fit to the Rasch model with acceptable targeting and uni-dimensionality. A six-item version of the disability subscale exhibited adequate fit in the Danish version. The same items were also found to fit the Rasch model in the English version.

Conclusions

The measurement properties of the Danish SPADI are similar to those of the English version. SPADI should be reported as two separate subscales. For the pain subscale, DIF with respect to age was disclosed, but the impact was small. The eight-item disability subscale did not fit the Rasch model. A six-item version of the disability subscale exhibited adequate fit in the Danish version. The same items were also found to fit the Rasch model in the English version.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Andersen, E. B. (1973). A goodness of fit test for the rasch model. Psychometrika, 38(1), 123–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Buchbinder, R., Page, M. J., Huang, H., Verhagen, A. P., Beaton, D., Kopkow, C., et al. (2017). A preliminary core domain set for clinical trials of shoulder disorders: A report from the OMERACT 2016 shoulder core outcome set special interest group. The Journal of Rheumatology, 44(12), 1880–1883.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Christensen, K. B., Kreiner, S., & Mesbah, M. (Eds.). (2013). Rasch models in health. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Christensen, K. B., Makransky, G., & Horton, M. (2017). Critical values for Yen’s Q 3: Identification of local dependence in the Rasch model using residual correlations. Applied Psychological Measurement, 41(3), 178–194.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Christensen, K. B., & Olsbjerg, M. (2013). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation in polytomous Rasch models using SAS. Pub Inst Stat Univ, 57, 69–84.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Christiansen, D. H., Andersen, J. H., & Haahr, J. P. (2013). Cross-cultural adaption and measurement properties of the Danish version of the shoulder pain and disability index. Clinical Rehabilitation, 27(4), 355–360.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Clausen, M., Witten, A., Holm, K., Christensen, K., Attrup, M., Hölmich, P., et al. (2017). Glenohumeral and scapulothoracic strength impairments exists in patients with subacromial impingement, but these are not reflected in the shoulder pain and disability index. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 18(1), 302.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Clausen, M. B., Merrild, M. B., Witten, A., Christensen, K. B., Zebis, M. K., Hölmich, P., et al. (2018). Conservative treatment for patients with subacromial impingement: Changes in clinical core outcomes and their relation to specific rehabilitation parameters. PeerJ, 6, e4400.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Dawson, J., Harris, K. K., Doll, H., Fitzpatrick, R., & Carr, A. (2016). A comparison of the Oxford shoulder score and shoulder pain and disability index: Factor structure in the context of a large randomized controlled trial. Patient Related Outcome Measures, 7, 195–203.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Edelen, M. O., Thissen, D., Teresi, J. A., Kleinman, M., & Ocepek-Welikson, K. (2006). Identification of differential item functioning using item response theory and the likelihood-based model comparison approach: Application to the mini-mental state examination. Medical Care, 44(11), S134–S142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fischer, G. H., & Molenaar, I. W. (Eds.). (1995). Rasch models. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Holland, P. W., & Wainer, H. (1993). Differential Item Functioning. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Horton, M., Marais, I., & Christensen, K. B. (2013). Dimensionality. Rasch models in health (pp. 137–158). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Jerosch-Herold, C., Chester, R., Shepstone, L., Vincent, J. I., & MacDermid, J. C. (2017). An evaluation of the structural validity of the shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) using the Rasch model. Quality of Life Research, 27(2), 389–400.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kelderman, H. (1984). Loglinear Rasch model tests. Psychometrika, 49(2), 223–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kreiner, S. (2003). Introduction to DIGRAM. Research Report 10, Department of Statistics, University of Copenhagen.

  18. Kreiner, S. (2011). A note on item-restscore association in Rasch models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 35(7), 557–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kreiner, S., & Christensen, K. B. (2011). Item screening in graphical loglinear Rasch models. Psychometrika, 76(2), 228–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kreiner, S., & Nielsen, T. (2013). Item analysis in DIGRAM 3.04: Part I: Guided tours. Department of Biostastistics, University of Copenhagen.

  21. Marais, I. (2013). Local dependence. In Rasch models in health (pp. 111–130). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  22. Page, M. J., Huang, H., Verhagen, A. P., Gagnier, J. J., & Buchbinder, R. (2018). Outcome reporting in randomized trials for shoulder disorders: Literature review to inform the development of a core outcome set. Arthritis Care & Research, 70(2), 252–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pallant, J. F., & Tennant, A. (2007). An introduction to the Rasch measurement model: An example using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 46(1), 1–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Copenhagen: Danish National Institute for Educational Research.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Roach, K. E., Budiman-Mak, E., Songsiridej, N., & Lertratanakul, Y. (1991). Development of a shoulder pain and disability index. Arthritis Care and Research: The Official Journal of the Arthritis Health Professions Association, 4(4), 143–149.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Roy, J.-S., MacDermid, J. C., & Woodhouse, L. J. (2009). Measuring shoulder function: A systematic review of four questionnaires. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 61(5), 623–632.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. SAS Institute (2013). SAS 9.4 Language reference: Concepts. Cary: SAS Institute Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Van der linden, W. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (1997). Handbook of modern item response theory. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  29. Witten, A., Clausen, M. B., Thorborg, K., Attrup, M. L., & Hölmich, P. (2018). Patients who are candidates for subacromial decompression have more pronounced range of motion deficits, but do not differ in self-reported shoulder function, strength or pain compared to non-candidates. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy: Official Journal of the ESSKA, 26(8), 2505–2511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Karl Bang Christensen

  2. Department of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Health and Technology, Metropolitan University College, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Mikkel Bek Clausen

  3. Sports Orthopedic Research Center-Copenhagen (SORC-C), Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Copenhagen University Hospital, Amager-Hvidovre, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Kristian Thorborg, Per Hölmich & Mikkel Bek Clausen

  4. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Research-Copenhagen (PMR-C), Amager-Hvidovre Hospital, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Kristian Thorborg & Mikkel Bek Clausen

Authors
  1. Karl Bang Christensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kristian Thorborg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Per Hölmich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mikkel Bek Clausen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karl Bang Christensen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Ethical approval

This paper is based on a secondary analysis of data. The trial protocol, the informed consent forms, and other requested documents have been reviewed and approved by the Capitol Regional Ethics Committee in Denmark (H-16016763) with respect to the scientific content and the compliance to the applicable health science regulations. All procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Christensen, K.B., Thorborg, K., Hölmich, P. et al. Rasch validation of the Danish version of the shoulder pain and disability index (SPADI) in patients with rotator cuff-related disorders. Qual Life Res 28, 795–800 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-2052-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-2052-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation