Adaptation of the XXXX Index to Kannada Language and Evaluation of Its Validity and Reliability.

@entity1 @entity717 @entity1643 @entity227
STUDY DESIGN: A translation, cross-cultural adaptation, and validation study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to translate, adapt cross-culturally, and validate the Kannada version of the @entity717 Index (ODI). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: @entity1643 is recognized as an important public health problem. Self-administered condition-specific questionnaires are important tools for assessing a @entity1 . For low backache, the ODI is used widely. Preferred language of a region can have an effect on interpretation of questions and thus scoring. A search of literature showed no previously validated Kannada version of the ODI. METHODS: Cross-cultural adaptation and translation was carried out according to previously set guidelines. @entity1 were recruited from the orthopedic outpatient department. They filled out a booklet containing the Kannada version of the ODI, Kannada version of the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), and a 10-point @entity227 ( @entity227 ). RESULTS: The Kannada ODI was answered by 91 @entity1 and retested in 35 @entity1 . After removing questionnaires with stray or ambiguous markings causing difficulty in computation of scores, 76 test questionnaires and 32 retest questionnaires were available for statistical analysis. The Kannada version showed an excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha=0.92). The Kannada version of the ODI showed good correlation with the RMDQ (r=0.72) and moderate correlation with @entity227 (r=0.58). It also showed an excellent test-retest reliability (ICC=0.96). Standard error of measurement (SEM) was also low (4.08) and a difference of 11 points is the "Minimum Detectable Change (MDC)." CONCLUSION: The Kannada version of the ODI that was developed showed consistency and reliability. It can be used for assessment of @entity1643 and treatment outcomes in Kannada-speaking populations. However, in view of a smaller sample size, it will benefit from verification at multiple centers and with more @entity1 . LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.
