Cultural adaptation and content validation of the Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire (CMDQ) for Brazil
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v10i12.20412Keywords:
Ergonomics; Validation study; Musculoskeletal Pain; Cumulative trauma disorders.Abstract
Objective: Culturally adapt the Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire (CMDQ) to Brazilian Portuguese and assess content validity. Method: Methodological study. The five steps proposed by the literature for cultural adaptation were adopted. To analyze the data from the expert committee evaluation, the content validity index (CVI) and the Content Validity Coefficient per item (CVCi) were calculated considering values above 0.80 and 0.78, respectively. Results: The CMDQ was submitted for translation into Portuguese by two independent translators. Based on the two translated versions, a consensual version was developed which was subjected to a back-translation. The translated versions, the consensual version in Portuguese and the back-translated versions were submitted for evaluation by a committee composed of five experts. After analysis by the expert committee, the total CVI of the questionnaire was 0.78. Seven items had CVCi below 0.78 (range 0.68 to 0.76). For the evaluation, all the recommendations of the committee were considered, and all the items indicated by the experts were changed. The changes in the items were made according to expert recommendations. All changes were made in the back-translated version of the CMDQ and resubmitted to the original author for approval of the final version. Conclusions: The cultural adaptation stage of the CMDQ for Brazil was completed with relevant results. The process of cultural adaptation and validation of the CMDQ is underway, the pre-test stage and, later, the validation stage will be carried out in research.
References
Aaronson, N. et al. (2002). Scientific Advisory Committee of medical Outcomes Trust. Assessing health status and quality of life instruments: attributes and review criteria. Quality of Life Research, 11, 193-205.
Abrahão, J. I. (2000). Reestruturação Produtiva e Variabilidade do Trabalho: Uma Abordagem da Ergonomia. Psicologia: Teoria e Pesquisa 16(1), 49–54.
Afifehzadeh-Kashani, H., Choobineh, A., Bakand, S., Gohari, M. R., Abbastabar, H. & Moshtaghi, P. (2011). Validity and reliability of farsi version of Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire (CMDQ). Iran Occupational Health, 7(4), 69-75.
Barros, E. N. C. & Alexandre, N. M. C. (2003). Cross-cultural adaptation of the Nordic musculoskeletal questionnaire. International Nursing Review, 50, 101–108.
Beaton, D., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2007). Recommendations for the crosscultural adaptation of the DASH & Quick. DASH outcome measures. Institute for Work & Health.
Beaton, D., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., & Ferraz, M. B. (2000). Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25 (24), 3186-3191.
Carrasquero, E. E. C. (2015). Adaptación y validación española del instrumento de percepción Cornell musculoskeletal discomfort questionnaires (CMDQ). Desarrollo Gerencial, 7(2), 36-46.
Carvalho, A. J. F. P. & Alexandre, N. M. C. (2006). Sintomas osteomusculares em professores do Ensino Fundamental. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, 10 (1), 35-41.
Charter, R. A. (2003). Study samples are too small to produce sufficiently precise reliability coefficients. The Journal of General Psychology, 130(2),117-129.
ColuciI, M. Z. O. & Alexandre, N. M. C. (2009). Development of a questionnaire to evaluate the usability of assessment instruments. Revista Enfermagem UERJ, 17(3), 378-832.
Erdinc, O., Hot, K. & Ozkaya, M. (2011). Turkish version of the Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire: Cross cultural adaptation and validation. Work, 39(3), 251–260.
Ferreira, E., Dantas, R. A. S., Rossi, L. A. & Ciol, M. A. (2008). The cultural adaptation and validation of the Burn Specific Health Scale Revised (BSHS-R): version for Brazilian burn victims. Burns, 34(7), 994-1001
Freitas, N. O., Forero, C. G., Alonso, J., Caltran, M. P., Dantas, R. A. S., Farina, J. A. & Rossi, L. A. (2017). Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Social Comfort Questionnaire for Brazilian adult survivors of burns. Quality of Life Research, 26,205-211.
Freitas, N. O., Caltran, M. P., Dantas, R. A. S., Rossi, L. A. (2014). Translation and cultural adaptation of the Perceived Stigmatization Questionnaire for burn
victims in Brazil. Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, 48, 25-33.
Guillemin, F., Bombardier, C. & Beaton, D. E. (1993). Crosscultural adaptation of health - related quality of life measures: literature review and proposed guidelines. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 46 (12), 1427-1432.
Grant, J. S. & Davis, L. L. (1997). Selection and use of content experts for instrument development. Research in Nursing & Health, 20(3), 269-274.
Hedge, A., Morimoto, S, & McCrobie, D. (1999). Effects of keyboard tray geometry on upper body posture and comfort. Ergonomics, 42 (10), 1333-1349.
Kreuzfeld, S., Seibt, R., Kumar, M., Rieger, A. & Stoll, R. (2016). German version of the Cornell Musculoskeletal Discomfort Questionnaire (CMDQ): Translation and validation. Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology, 11:13.
Kuorinka, I. et al. (1987). Standardised Nordic Questionnaires for the Analysis of Musculoskeletal Symptoms. Applied Ergonomics, 18, 233–237.
Lynn, M. R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing Research, 35(6), 382-385.
Monteiro, M. A. M. (2009). Importância da ergonomia na saúde dos funcionários de unidades de alimentação e nutrição. Revista Baiana, 33(3), 416-427.
Mota, I. L., Quadros Júnior, M. C., Munaro, H. L. R. & Vilela, A. B. (2014). Sintomas osteomusculares de servidores de uma universidade pública brasileira: um estudo ergonômico. Revista Brasileira em Promoção da Saúde, 27(3), 341-348.
Pimenta, C. A. M & Teixeira, M. J. (1996). Questionário de dor McGill: proposta de adaptação para a língua portuguesa. Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, 30 (3), 473-483.
Polit, D. F. & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489-497.
Rubio, D. M., Berg-Weger, M., Tebb, S. S., Lee, S. & Rauch, S. (2003). Objectifying content validity: conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social Work Research, 27(2), 94-105.
Santos, V. L. C. G., Nascentes, C. C., Freitas, N. O., Oliveira, M. W. & Castro, D. L. V. (2020). Cultural Adaptation and Validation of the Ostomy Adjustment Inventory-23 for Brazil. Wound Management & Prevention, 66, 32-40.
Serranheira, F. et al. (2004). Da saúde e segurança do trabalho à saúde e segurança dos trabalhadores: um (ainda) longo caminho a percorrer: 2.ª parte: uma perspectiva da ergonomia no contexto da saúde e segurança do trabalho (SST). Segurança. Ano XLIX: 2009a; 189:18-23.
Vitta, A. De,Bertaglia, R. S. & Padovani, C. R. (2008). Efeitos de dois procedimentos educacionais sobre os sintomas musculoesqueléticos em trabalhadores administrativos. Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, 12 (1), 20-25.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Joseph Daniel Alves Aleixo ; Meline Rossetto Kron-Rodrigues; Alfredo Almeida Pina-Oliveira ; Noélle de Oliveira Freitas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
