J Korean Soc Spine Surg.  2005 Jun;12(2):146-152. 10.4184/jkss.2005.12.2.146.

Cross-cultural Adaptation of the Korean Version Of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)

• Jeon CH
• Kim DJ
• Kim DJ
• Lee HM
• Park HJ

• KMID: 1583458
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4184/jkss.2005.12.2.146

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-cultural adaptation of the Korean version of the Oswestry Disability Index (KODI).
OBJECTIVES
To conduct the cross-cultural adaptation for translating the original version of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (English version) SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW: Society is multicultural populations income. (This makes no sense?) Since languages and cultures are highly related, any cross-cultural assessment must be addressed in the outcome of the measurements. (I have made this into a proper sentence, but the meaning is still unclear, please confirm?) The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) has not been translated into Korean, but is the most widely used tool in the world for measuring the intensity of back pain. MATERIAL AND METHOD: We used the guideline for the translation and cultural adaptation process, (Where were these guidelines from?) including forward translation, synthesis of translation, backward translation, committee review, pre-testing, test of the pro-final version, and finally, submission of the documentation to the developers. The Korean version of the Oswestry Disability Index (KODI) was tested on 116 patients with chronic low back pain.
RESULTS
The reliability for the KODI, as measured by the Cronbach's alpha value, was 0.9168, and the reliability of the testretest was 0.9331. The process results were reported to the developer (Dr. Jeremy Fairbank), who appraised the KODI.
CONCLUSIONS
The KODI was found to have satisfactory reliability. Therefore, the KODI can be recommended as a tool for the measurement of lower back pain in Korea.

Keyword

Korean; Oswestry Disability Index; Cross-cultural adaptation

MeSH Terms

Back Pain
Humans
Korea
Low Back Pain
Translating

Reference

1). Amadio PC. Outcomes measurement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993; 75:1583–1584.

2). Tonali P, Padua L, Sanguinetti C, Padua R, Romanini E, Amadio P. Outcome research and patient oriented measures in the multiperspective assessment of neurological and musculoskeletal disorders. Ital J Neurol Sci. 1999; 20:139–140.

3). Dennis MD, Greene RL, Farr SP, Hartman JT. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: general guidelines to its use and interpretation in orthopedics. Clin Orthop. 1980; 150:125–130.

4). Hansen FR, Biering-Sorensen F, Schroll M. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory profiles in persons with or without low back pain. A 20-year follow-up study. Spine. 1995; 20:2716–2720.

5). Million R, Hall W, Nilsen KH, Baker RD, Jayson MI. Assessment of the progress of the back pain patient. Volvo Award in Clinical Science. Spine. 1982; 7:204–212.

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

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

8). Guillemin F, Bombardier C, Beaton D. C ross-cu ltural adaptation of health- related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993; 46:1417–1432.

9). Campos SS, Johnson TM. Cultural consideration. Spilker B, editor. Quality of life in clinical trials. New York: Raven Press;1990. p. 163–170.

10). Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine. 2000; 25:2940–2952.

11). Herdman M, Fox-Rushby J, Badia X. A model of equiva -lence in the cultural adaptation of HRQoL instruments the universalist approach. Qual Life Res. 1988; 7:323–335.

12). Fairbank JCT, Couper J, Davies JB, O'Brien JP. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physio -therapy. 1980; 66:271–273.

13). Roland M, Morris R. A study of the natural history of low-back pain. Part II: development of guidelines for trials of treatment in primary care. Spine. 1983; 8:145–150.