Validity and reliability of Turkish version of STarT Back Screening Tool

The psychosocial factors that may affect the prognosis of patients with low back pain are generally disregarded. The StarT Back Screening Tool can help clinicians to analyze prognostic indicators and the risk associated with outcome by examining physical and psychosocial factors. The aim of this stu...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Aǧrı 2019-11, Vol.31 (4), p.163-171
Hauptverfasser: Yılmaz Yelvar, Gül Deniz, Dalkılıç, Murat, Çırak, Yasemin, Parlak Demir, Yasemin, Karadüz, Beyza Nur, Parlak, Mümüne Merve
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The psychosocial factors that may affect the prognosis of patients with low back pain are generally disregarded. The StarT Back Screening Tool can help clinicians to analyze prognostic indicators and the risk associated with outcome by examining physical and psychosocial factors. The aim of this study was to investigate the psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the StarT Back Screening Tool, including cross-cultural adaptation, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and construct validity. In this study, 120 patients with non-specific low back pain were included. The Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index, Beck Depression Inventory, Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia, and the StarT Back Screening Tool were administered. One week after the initial testing, the same examiner repeated the tests. The mean age of the patients who participated in the study was 35.54±12.45 years. Cronbach's alpha coefficients in the analysis of scale reliability were 0.747 for the overall scale and 0.738 for the psychosocial subscale. The test-retest reliability of StarT Back Screening Tool (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.90-0.93) was found to be excellent. Pearson correlation coefficients for the correlations between the overall StarT Back Screening Tool and the other measures were very good (r=0.678; p
ISSN:1300-0012
DOI:10.14744/agri.2019.99266