1. Psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the revised neurophysiology of pain questionnaire.
- Author
-
Reynebeau I, van Buchem B, Jäger K, Lexmond W, Leysen L, Munneke W, Nijs J, Roose E, Lahousse A, and De Kooning M
- Subjects
- Humans, Male, Female, Netherlands, Belgium, Middle Aged, Surveys and Questionnaires standards, Adult, Reproducibility of Results, Aged, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, Pain Measurement methods, Pain psychology, Pain physiopathology, Neoplasms, Psychometrics standards
- Abstract
Background: Understanding pain and its mechanisms can play an important role in (post-) cancer rehabilitation. In order to test patient's knowledge of pain, the Revised Neurophysiology of Pain Questionnaire was developed and translated into Dutch (RNPQ-NL). However, its psychometric properties have not been examined yet., Objective: The goal is to examine the psychometric properties of the RNPQ-NL as a tool to measure the knowledge of pain; in addition, its cross-cultural validity between Belgian and Dutch participants is examined., Methods: 277 persons from Belgium and the Netherlands participated in this study. Cancer patients and survivors (CPaS) (n = 115) were compared to a group of experts with medical training (n = 97). Highly educated individuals without medical background (n = 65) served as control group. The RNPQ-NL was filled out twice and scores analysed in accordance with the COSMIN-recommendation for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status instruments., Results: The RNPQ-NL was able to distinguish between high and low knowledge of pain. The CPaS group scored significantly lower on the RNPQ-NL compared to the expert group (p < 0.001), but not in comparison to the control group (p=1.00). The Belgian CPaS scored lower than the Dutch CPaS (p=0.001), with a medium effect size (d = 0.481), showing acceptable cross-cultural validity. The Cronbach's α was 0.625, showing some heterogeneity of the items. The test-retest reliability was adequate (ICC = 0.794)., Conclusion: This study supports the interpretability, test-retest reliability, discriminative, and cross-cultural validity of the RNPQ-NL. Internal consistency is suboptimal but acceptable for measuring the knowledge of pain in CPaS., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Astrid Lahousse reports financial support was provided by Research Foundation Flanders. Eva Roose reports financial support was provided by Fight against Cancer. Jo Nijs reports financial support was provided by Berekuyl Academy. If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF