Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Mar 7:14:1101383.
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1101383. eCollection 2023.

Development, validation and psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the biopsychosocial impact scale in orofacial pain patients

Ze-Yue Ou-Yang  1 , Yao Feng  1 , Dong-Dong Xie  2 , Yi-Fan Yang  1 , Yun Chen  1 , Ning-Xin Chen  1 , Xiao-Lin Su  1 , Bi-Fen Kuang  1 , Jie Zhao  1 , Ya-Qiong Zhao  1 , Yun-Zhi Feng  1 , Yue Guo  1
Affiliations

Development, validation and psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the biopsychosocial impact scale in orofacial pain patients

Ze-Yue Ou-Yang et al. Front Psychol. .

Abstract

Background: The objective of this study was to develop the Chinese version of the biopsychosocial impact scale (BPIm-S) to assess functional limitation and psychosocial distress in orofacial pain (OFP) patients in mainland China, and investigate the factor structure, reliability and validity, measurement invariance, as well as scores differences across genders, age and educational status among OFP patients.

Methods: The BPIm-S was developed and evaluated in four stages: (1) concept selection and item generation; (2) a pilot study assessing face and content validity; (3) the factors structure, reliability, convergent validity, and measurement invariance; and (4) concurrent validity and clinical responsiveness. Exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) were performed on data gathered from 406 OFP patients to assess construct validity. Composite Reliability (CR) and the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) were used to assess internal convergent validity. CR, internal consistency, and split-half reliability were also performed to determine the reliability. Multigroup CFA (MGCFA) was used to assess measurement invariance across genders, age and educational status. Mann-Whitney test compared scores across different genders, age and educational status. Participants completed the BPIm-S, visual analog scale (VAS), brief pain inventory facial (BPI-F), General Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), and spearman's correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the concurrent validity and item-total correlations. A total of 12 patients with OFP completed the BPIm-S twice to test clinical responsiveness. To conduct the CFA and measurement invariance analysis, Mplus 8.4 was used. IBM SPSS Statistics 21 software and SPSSAU, a web-based data science algorithm platform tool, were used for all additional studies.

Results: For the preliminary version, 17 items were chosen. A total of four items were removed following the pilot research. The remaining 13 items of the BPIm-S comprised an overall summary scale. Excellent reliability (Item-to-total correlations ranged from 0.763 to 0.912) and strong internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.970, functional limitation, 0.962, and psychosocial distress, 0.977) were discovered. CFA also validated the structural validity of the 13-item scale. EFA was performed and a two-factor structure was investigated. In addition, MGCFA corroborated the measurement invariance of the BPIm-S across gender, age, and educational status. Patients over the age of 30, those with a medium level of education, and those with a low level of education showed substantially greater levels of functional limitation and psychological distress (Wilcoxon test, p < 0.001). Both concurrent validity and clinical responsiveness were assessed to be of good quality.

Conclusion: The BPIm-S demonstrated good psychometric qualities and is a reliable tool that can now be used by clinicians to evaluate functional limitation and psychosocial distress among OFP patient.

Keywords: Chinese patients; chronic orofacial pain; clinical responsiveness; factor analysis; measurement invariance; scale development.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

FIGURE 1
FIGURE 1
Phases in the development of the scale.
FIGURE 2
FIGURE 2
Diagram of OFP patient distribution.
FIGURE 3
FIGURE 3
The scree plot of the BPIm-S factors.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Aggarwal V. R., Lunt M., Zakrzewska J. M., Macfarlane G. J., Macfarlane T. V. (2005). Development and validation of the manchester orofacial pain disability scale. Community Dent. Oral Epidemiol. 33 141–149. 10.1111/j.1600-0528.2004.00193.x - DOI - PubMed
    1. Aguiar A. D. S., Nogueira Carrer H. C., de Lira M. R., Martins Silva G. Z., Chaves T. C. (2021). Patient-reported outcome measurements in temporomandibular disorders and headaches: Summary of measurement properties and applicability. J. Clin. Med. 10:3823. 10.3390/jcm10173823 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. American Psychiatric Association (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5, Vol. 5. Washington, DC: American psychiatric association.
    1. Boateng G. O., Neilands T. B., Frongillo E. A., Melgar-Quiñonez H. R., Young S. L. (2018). Best practices for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: A primer. Front. Public Health 6:149. 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00149 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bonett D. G., Wright T. A. (2015). Cronbach’s alpha reliability: Interval estimation, hypothesis testing, and sample size planning. J. Organ. Behav. 36 3–15.

LinkOut - more resources