Validation of the Spanish version of the migraine disability assessment questionnaire (MIDAS) in university students with migraine.
Disability evaluation
Headache
Migraine disorders
Reproducibility of results
Surveys and questionnaires
Journal
BMC neurology
ISSN: 1471-2377
Titre abrégé: BMC Neurol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968555
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
24 Feb 2020
24 Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
02
12
2019
accepted:
17
02
2020
entrez:
26
2
2020
pubmed:
26
2
2020
medline:
1
7
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire is widely used to determine the degree of migraine-related disability of subjects. So far, and to the best of our knowledge, no Spanish version of this tool has been validated. The questionnaire comprises seven items, with the first five constituting the main scale while the sixth and seventh items referring, respectively, to the frequency and intensity of headache. The present study aims to analyze the clinimetric properties of the Spanish version of the MIDAS questionnaire in a population of university students. We performed a cross-sectional study of validation for this measuring instrument. A total of 153 subjects participated in the study. We analyzed construct validity using factor analysis, test-retest reliability by the Intraclass Correlation Coeficient (ICC), internal consistency, and concurrent validity with respect to the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12). Factor analysis revealed a two-factor structure. The questionnaire has good reliability for the MIDAS main-scale score ([ICC = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.63-0.90]), excellent reliability for headache frequency (ICC = 0.90; 95%; CI: [0.79-0.95]), and moderately good reliability for headache intensity (ICC = 0.63; 95% CI: [0.34-0.80]). The analysis also yielded good internal consistency results (α Cronbach = 0.797) and a moderate correlation between MIDAS-main scale and the physical component summary of SF-12 (Rho = - 0.326; p < 0.001). The Spanish version of the MIDAS questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool to measure migraine-related disability in university subjects. The two additional items provide information that could help clinicians in making decisions.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) questionnaire is widely used to determine the degree of migraine-related disability of subjects. So far, and to the best of our knowledge, no Spanish version of this tool has been validated. The questionnaire comprises seven items, with the first five constituting the main scale while the sixth and seventh items referring, respectively, to the frequency and intensity of headache. The present study aims to analyze the clinimetric properties of the Spanish version of the MIDAS questionnaire in a population of university students.
METHODS
METHODS
We performed a cross-sectional study of validation for this measuring instrument. A total of 153 subjects participated in the study. We analyzed construct validity using factor analysis, test-retest reliability by the Intraclass Correlation Coeficient (ICC), internal consistency, and concurrent validity with respect to the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Factor analysis revealed a two-factor structure. The questionnaire has good reliability for the MIDAS main-scale score ([ICC = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.63-0.90]), excellent reliability for headache frequency (ICC = 0.90; 95%; CI: [0.79-0.95]), and moderately good reliability for headache intensity (ICC = 0.63; 95% CI: [0.34-0.80]). The analysis also yielded good internal consistency results (α Cronbach = 0.797) and a moderate correlation between MIDAS-main scale and the physical component summary of SF-12 (Rho = - 0.326; p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The Spanish version of the MIDAS questionnaire is a valid and reliable tool to measure migraine-related disability in university subjects. The two additional items provide information that could help clinicians in making decisions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32093620
doi: 10.1186/s12883-020-01646-y
pii: 10.1186/s12883-020-01646-y
pmc: PMC7038557
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Validation Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
67Références
Lancet. 2015 Aug 22;386(9995):743-800
pubmed: 26063472
Neurologia (Engl Ed). 2021 Nov-Dec;36(9):692-697
pubmed: 34752347
Int J Med Educ. 2011 Jun 27;2:53-55
pubmed: 28029643
J Headache Pain. 2018 Nov 15;19(1):109
pubmed: 30442090
J Neurol Sci. 2017 Jan 15;372:307-315
pubmed: 28017235
Psychol Bull. 1979 Mar;86(2):420-8
pubmed: 18839484
Neuropsychol Rev. 2016 Jun;26(2):129-59
pubmed: 27393566
J Clin Epidemiol. 1998 Nov;51(11):913-23
pubmed: 9817108
Ann Indian Acad Neurol. 2010 Oct;13(4):276-83
pubmed: 21264136
Pain Med. 2019 Mar 1;20(3):486-494
pubmed: 30011037
Pharmacoecon Open. 2018 Mar;2(1):77-85
pubmed: 29464670
Neurology. 1999 Sep 22;53(5):988-94
pubmed: 10496257
Neurologia. 2015 Mar;30(2):83-9
pubmed: 24332784
Lancet Neurol. 2018 Nov;17(11):954-976
pubmed: 30353868
Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018 Mar 9;16(1):42
pubmed: 29523138
J Headache Pain. 2014 May 21;15:31
pubmed: 24884549
Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:435856
pubmed: 25121099
Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:978064
pubmed: 24527462
Med Clin (Barc). 2008 May 24;130(19):726-35
pubmed: 18570798
Headache. 2003 Jul-Aug;43(7):767-73
pubmed: 12890131
CNS Drugs. 2006;20 Spec no.1:24-36
pubmed: 16841524
Cephalalgia. 2013 Jul;33(9):629-808
pubmed: 23771276
Headache. 2008 Oct;48(9):1349-55
pubmed: 18194304