Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire

Year 2018, Volume: 35 Issue: 3, 238 - 244, 01.05.2018

Hazel Ekin Akmaz Meltem Uyar Yasemin Kuzeyli Yıldırım Esra Akın Korhan

Abstract

Background: Pain acceptance is the process of giving up the struggle with pain and learning to live a worthwhile life despite it. In assessing patients with chronic pain in Turkey, making a diagnosis and tracking the effectiveness of treatment is done with scales that have been translated into Turkish. However, there is as yet no valid and reliable scale in Turkish to assess the acceptance of pain.Aims: To validate a Turkish version of the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire developed by McCracken and colleagues. Study Design: Methodological and cross sectional study.Methods: A simple randomized sampling method was used in selecting the study sample. The sample was composed of 201 patients, more than 10 times the number of items examined for validity and reliability in the study, which totaled 20. A patient identification form, the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire, and the Brief Pain Inventory were used to collect data. Data were collected by face-to-face interviews. In the validity testing, the content validity index was used to evaluate linguistic equivalence, content validity, construct validity, and expert views. In reliability testing of the scale, Cronbach’s α coefficient was calculated, and item analysis and split-test reliability methods were used. Principal component analysis and varimax rotation were used in factor analysis and to examine factor structure for construct concept validity.Results: The item analysis established that the scale, all items, and item-total correlations were satisfactory. The mean total score of the scale was 21.78. The internal consistency coefficient was 0.94, and the correlation between the two halves of the scale was 0.89.Conclusion: The Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire, which is intended to be used in Turkey upon confirmation of its validity and reliability, is an evaluation instrument with sufficient validity and reliability, and it can be reliably used to examine patients’ acceptance of chronic pain.

Keywords

Acceptance, chronic pain, methodological study, reliability, Turkish, validity

References

• 1. Erdine S. Ağrı Sendromları ve Tedavisi. 2. Baskı. İstanbul: Gizben Matbaacılık; 2003.
• 2. Duarte RA. Classification of Pain. In: Duarte RA, Kanner R, editors. Pain Management Secrets. Hanley&Belfus; 2003:6-9.
• 3. Raj PP, Erdine S. Ağrı Taksonomisi. 3. Baskı. İstanbul: Nobel Matbaacılık; 2007.
• 4. Çeliker R. Kronik ağrı sendromları. Türk Fiz Tıp Rehab Derg 2008;51(Özel Sayı):14-8.
• 5. Soykan A, Kumbasar H. Kronik Ağrı tedavisinde Psikiyatrik yaklaşımlar. Klinik Psikiyatri Dergisi 1999;2:109-16.
• 6. Turk DC, Swanson KS, Wilson HD. Psychological Aspects of Pain. In: Fishman SM, Ballantyne JC, Rathmell JP, editors. Bonica’s Management of Pain. Philedelphia: Williams&Wilkins; 2010:74-85.
• 7. Talu GK, Erdine S. Ağrılı Hastanın Değerlendirilmesi. 3. Basım. İstanbul: Nobel Matbaacılık; 2007.
• 8. Aldemir T, Erdine S. Ağrılı Hastalarda Ağrı Ölçümü. 3. Basım. İstanbul: Nobel Tıp Kitabevleri; 2007.
• 9. Güzeldemir ME. Ağrı değerlendirme yöntemleri. Sendrom Aktüel Tıp Dergisi 1995;7:11-25.
• 10. Eti-Aslan F. Ağrının Doğası ve Kontrölü. 2. Basım. İstanbul: Avrupa Tıp Kitapçılık; 2006.
• 11. Jensen Mark P. Measurement of Pain. 4. Basım. 2010.
• 12. Edwards RR. Pain Assessment. In: Benzon HT, Raja SN, Molloy RE, Liu SS, Fishman SM, editors. Essentials of PainMedicine and Regional Anesthesia, Second edition. Michigan University: Elsevier-Churchill Livingstone; 2005:29-34.
• 13. Aksayan S, Gözüm S. Kültürlerarası Ölçek Uyarlaması İçin Rehber I: Ölçek Uyarlama Aşamaları ve Dil Uyarlaması. Hemşirelik Araştırma Dergisi 2002;4:1-10.
• 14. Yücel A, Şenocak M, Orhan E, Çimen A, Ertaş M. Results of the Leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs pain scale in Turkey: a validation study. J Pain 2004;5:427-32.
• 15. Dicle A, Karayurt O, Dirimese E. Validation of the Turkish Version of the Brief Pain Inventory in Surgery Patients. Pain Manag Nurs 2009;10:107-13.
• 16. Geiser DS. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. A comparision of acceptance-focused and control-focused psychological treatments in a chronic pain treatment center. University of Nevada-Reno; 1992.
• 17. Mc Cracken LM, Spertus IL, Janeck AS, Sinclair D, Wetzel FT. Behavioral dimensions of adjustment in persons with chronic pain: Pain related anxiety and acceptance. Pain 1999;80:283-9.
• 18. Viane I, Crombez G, Eccleston C, Devulder J, De Corte W. Acceptance of the unpleasant reality of chronic pain: Effect upon attention to pain and engagement with Daily activities. Pain 2004;112:282-8.
• 19. McCracken LM, Vowles KE, Ecclestton C. Acceptance of chronic pain: component analysis and a revised assessment method. Pain 2004;107:159-66.
• 20. Nicholas MK, Asghari A. Investigating acceptance in adjustment to chronic pain: is acceptance broader than we thought? Pain 2006;124:269-79.
• 21. Reneman MF, Dijkstra A, Geertzen JH, Dijkstra PU. Psychometric properties of Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaires: A systematic review. Eur J Pain 2010;14:457-65.
• 22. Gyurcsik NC, Brawley LR, Spink KS, Glazebrook KE, Anderson TJ. Is level of pain acceptance differentially related to social cognitions and behavior? The case of active women with arthritis. J Health Psychol 2011;16:530-9.
• 23. Bernini O, Pennato T, Cosci F, Berrocal C. The psychometric properties of the chronic pain acceptance questionnaire in Italian patients with chronic pain. J Health Psychol 2010;15:1236-45.
• 24. Rodero B, Garcia-Campayo J, Casanueva B, del HOYO YL, Serrano-Blanco A, Luciano JV. Validation of the Spanish version of the chronic pain acceptance questionnaire (CPAQ) for the assessment of acceptance in fibromyalgia. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010;8:37.
• 25. Cho S, Heiby EM, McCracken LM, Moon DE, Lee JH. Psychometric properties of a Korean version of the chronic pain acceptance questionnaire in chronic pain patients. Qual Life Res 2012;21:1059-64.
• 26. Mesgarian F, Asghari A, Shaeiri MR, Broumand A. The persian version of the chronic pain acceptance questionnaire. Clin Psychol Psychother 2013;20:350-8.
• 27. Liu Y, Wang L, Wei Y, Wang X, Xu T, Sun J. Validation of a Chinese version of the chronic pain acceptance questionnaire (CPAQ) and CPAQ-8 in chronic pain patients. Medicine (Baltimore) 2016;95:e4339.
• 28. Hilde E, Lena L, Øystein Sørebø. The Norwegian versions of the Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire CPAQ-20 and CPAQ-8-validation and reliability studies. Disabil Rehabil 2017;39:1441-8.
• 29. MacCallum RC, Widaman KF, Zhang S, Hong S. Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods 1999;4:84-99.
• 30. Erkuş A. Psikometri üzerine yazılar. 1. Basım. Ankara: Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları; 2003.
• 31. Gözüm S, Aksayan S. Kültürlerarası ölçek uyarlaması için rehber II: Psikometrik özellikler ve kültürlerarası karşılaştırma. Hemşirelik Araştırma Geliştirme Dergisi 2003;5:3-14.
• 32. Tavşancıl E. Tutumların ölçülmesi ve SPSS ileri veri analizi. 4. Basım. Ankara: Nobel Basımevi; 2005.
• 33. Karasar N. Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. 9. Basım. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım; 1999.
• 34. Akın Korhan E, Hakverdioğlu Yönt G, Ak B, Erdemir F. Hemşirelik tanılarını algılama ölçeğinin Türkçe geçerlik ve güvenirliği. Hemşirelik Araştırma Geliştirme Dergisi 2013;15:13-25.
• 35. Özdamar K. Paket programlar ile istatistiksel veri analizi. 4. Baskı. Eskişehir: Kaan Kitabevi; 2004.
• 36. Nicholas MK, Asghari A. Investigating acceptance in adjustment to chronic pain: is acceptance broader than we thought? Pain 2006;124:269-79.