Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cross-cultural adaptation and assessment of the reliability and validity of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) for the Brazilian-Portuguese language

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The use of patient-orientated questionnaires is of utmost importance in assessing the outcome of spine surgery. Standardisation, using a common set of outcome measures, is essential to aid comparisons across studies/in registries. The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) is a short, multidimensional outcome instrument validated for patients with spinal disorders. This study aimed to produce a Brazilian-Portuguese version of the COMI.

Methods

A cross-cultural adaptation of the COMI into Brazilian-Portuguese was carried out using established guidelines. 104 outpatients with chronic LBP (>3 months) were recruited from a Public Health Spine Medical Care Centre. They completed a questionnaire booklet containing the newly translated COMI, and other validated symptom-specific questionnaires: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Roland Morris disability scale (RM), and a pain visual analogue scale. All patients completed a second questionnaire within 7–10 days to assess reproducibility.

Results

The COMI summary score displayed minimal floor and ceiling effects. On re-test, the responses for each individual domain of the COMI were within 1 category in 98% patients for the domain ‘function’, 96% for ‘symptom-specific well-being’, 97% for ‘general quality of life’, 99% for ‘social disability’ and 100% for ‘work disability’. The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC2,1) for COMI pain and COMI summary scores were 0.91–0.96, which compared favourably with the corresponding values for the RM (ICC, 0.99) and ODI (ICC, 0.98). The standard error of measurement for the COMI was 0.6, giving a “minimum detectable change” (MDC95%) of approximately 1.7 points i.e., the minimum change to be considered “real change” beyond measurement error. The COMI scores correlated as hypothesised (Rho, 0.4–0.8) with the other symptom-specific questionnaires.

Conclusions

The reproducibility of the Brazilian-Portuguese version of the COMI was comparable to that of other language versions. The COMI scores correlated in the expected manner with existing but longer symptom-specific questionnaires suggesting good convergent validity for the COMI. The Brazilian-Portuguese COMI represents a valuable tool for Brazilian study-centres in future multicentre clinical studies and surgical registries.

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. Airaksinen O, Brox JI, Cedraschi C, Hildebrandt J, Klaber-Moffett J, Kovacs F, Mannion AF, Reis S, Staal JB, Ursin H, Zanoli G (2006) Chapter 4. European guidelines for the management of chronic nonspecific low back pain. Eur Spine J 15(Suppl 2):S192–S300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Andresen EM (2000) Criteria for assessing the tools of disability outcomes research. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 81:S15–S20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB (2000) Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 25:3186–3191

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bombardier C (2000) Outcome assessments in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders: summary and general recommendations. Spine 25:3100–3103

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Costa LO, Maher CG, Latimer J (2007) Self-report outcome measures for low back pain: searching for international cross-cultural adaptations. Spine 32:1028–1037

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Davidson M, Keating JL (2002) A comparison of five low back disability questionnaires: reliability and responsiveness. Phys Ther 82:8–24

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Deyo RA, Battie M, Beurskens AJHM, Bombardier C, Croft P, Koes B, Malmivaara A, Roland M, Von Korff M, Waddell G (1998) Outcome measures for low back pain research. A proposal for standardized use. Spine 23:2003–2013

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Fankhauser C, Mutter U, Aghayev E, Mannion AF (2011) Validity and responsiveness of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) for the neck. Eur Spine J. doi:10.1007/s00586-011-1921-4

  9. Ferrer M, Pellise F, Escudero O, Alvarez L, Pont A, Alonso J, Deyo R (2006) Validation of a minimum outcome core set in the evaluation of patients with back pain. Spine 31:1372–1379 (discussion 1380)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Genevay S, Cedraschi C, Marty M, Rozenberg S, de Goumoens P, Faundez A, Balague F, Porchet F, Mannion A (2009) Reliability and validity of the cross-culturally adapted French version of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI). Eur Spine J 18:S478

    Google Scholar 

  11. Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D (1993) Cross-cultural adaptation of health-related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol 46:1417–1432

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Haefeli M, Elfering A (2006) Pain assessment. Eur Spine J 15(Suppl 1):S17–S24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hagg O, Fritzell P, Nordwall A, Group SLSS (2003) The clinical importance of changes in outcome scores after treatment for chronic low back pain. Eur Spine J 12:12–20

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Hyland ME (2003) A brief guide to the selection of quality of life instrument. Health Qual Life Outcomes 1:24

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kessler JT, Melloh M, Zweig T, Aghayev E, Roder C (2011) Development of a documentation instrument for the conservative treatment of spinal disorders in the International Spine Registry, Spine Tango. Eur Spine J 20:369–379

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Mannion AF, Boneschi M, Teli M, Luca A, Zaina F, Negrini S, Schulz PJ (2011) Reliability and validity of the cross-culturally adapted Italian version of the Core Outcome Measures Index. Eur Spine J. doi:10.1007/s00586-011-1741-6

  17. Mannion AF, Elfering A, Staerkle R, Junge A, Grob D, Semmer NK, Jacobshagen N, Dvorak J, Boos N (2005) Outcome assessment in low back pain: how low can you go? Eur Spine J 14:1014–1026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mannion AF, Porchet F, Kleinstück F, Lattig F, Jeszenszky D, Bartanusz V, Dvorak J, Grob D (2009) The quality of spine surgery from the patient’s perspective: part 1. The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) in clinical practice. Eur Spine J 18:367–373

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mannion AF, Porchet F, Kleinstuck FS, Lattig F, Jeszenszky D, Bartanusz V, Dvorak J, Grob D (2009) The quality of spine surgery from the patient’s perspective: part 2. Minimal clinically important difference for improvement and deterioration as measured with the Core Outcome Measures Index. Eur Spine J 18:374–379

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. McHorney CA, Tarlov AR (1995) Individual-patient monitoring in clinical practice: are available health status surveys adequate? Qual Life Res 4:293–307

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Melloh M, Staub L, Aghayev E, Zweig T, Barz T, Theis JC, Chavanne A, Grob D, Aebi M, Roeder C (2008) The international spine registry SPINE TANGO: status quo and first results. Eur Spine J 17:1201–1209

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nevill AM, Lane AM, Kilgour LJ, Bowes N, Whyte GP (2001) Stability of psychometric questionnaires. J Sports Sci 19:273–278

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Nusbaum L, Natour J, Ferraz MB, Goldenberg J (2001) Translation, adaptation and validation of the Roland–Morris questionnaire—Brazil Roland–Morris. Braz J Med Biol Res 34:203–210

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Roder C, Chavanne A, Mannion AF, Grob D, Aebi M, El-Kerdi A (2005) SSE Spine Tango-content, workflow, set-up. http://www.eurospine.org-Spine Tango. A European spine registry. Eur Spine J 14:920–924

  25. Roland M, Morris R (1983) A study of the natural history of back pain. Part 1: development of a reliable and sensitive measure of disability in low-back pain. Spine 8:141–144

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Staerkle RF, Villiger P (2011) Simple questionnaire for assessing core outcomes in inguinal hernia repair. Br J Surg 98:148–155

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Streiner DL, Norman GR (1995) Health Measurement Scales: a practical guide to their development and use. Oxford University Press Inc., Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  28. Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, Bouter LM, de Vet HC (2007) Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 60:34–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Vigatto R, Alexandre NM, Correa Filho HR (2007) Development of a Brazilian Portuguese version of the Oswestry Disability Index: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:481–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. White P, Lewith G, Prescott P (2004) The core outcomes for neck pain: validation of a new outcome measure. Spine 29:1923–1930

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. WHOQOL (1998) The World Health Organisation WHOQOL-BREF Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQOL): development and general psychometric properties. Soc Sci Med 46:1569–1585

    Google Scholar 

  32. Zweig T, Mannion AF, Grob D, Melloh M, Munting E, Tuschel A, Aebi M, Roder C (2009) How to Tango: a manual for implementing Spine Tango. Eur Spine J 18(Suppl 3):312–320

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Andy Cumming, Mary Jo Haggerty and Silvana Claudia Saadi Salomão Ciccone for help with the translations.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Santa Casa e Asilo dos Pobres, Batatais, Brazil

    L. H. F. Damasceno & C. A. M. Barros

  2. Centro Universitário Claretiano, Batatais, Brazil

    P. A. G. Rocha, E. S. Barbosa & C. A. M. Barros

  3. Ribeirão Preto School of Medicine, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

    F. T. Canto & H. L. A. Defino

  4. Spine Center Division, Department of Research and Development, Schulthess Klinik, Lengghalde 2, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland

    A. F. Mannion

Authors
  1. L. H. F. Damasceno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. A. G. Rocha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. S. Barbosa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. C. A. M. Barros
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. F. T. Canto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. H. L. A. Defino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. A. F. Mannion
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. F. Mannion.

Appendix

Appendix

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Damasceno, L.H.F., Rocha, P.A.G., Barbosa, E.S. et al. Cross-cultural adaptation and assessment of the reliability and validity of the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) for the Brazilian-Portuguese language. Eur Spine J 21, 1273–1282 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-2100-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-2100-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation