Reliability, validity and minimum clinical importance difference of the Chinese version of the Zurich claudication questionnaire
Abstract The Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) has been translated and validated in multiple languages but few people have verified the measurement performance of the Chinese version of Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (Ch-ZCQ). The purpose of this study is to assess the performance of the Ch...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2025-05-01
|
| Series: | Scientific Reports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-01380-w |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849766683011448832 |
|---|---|
| author | Yi-xuan Gao Zhi-wen Weng Hui Shao Han Bo Zhi-hui Chen Meng Song Lu-ping Liu Ling-yun Zhang Jia-yu Liu Yu-han Wang Meng-meng Zhang Xi-you Wang Ya-nan Sun Chang-he Yu Xi-you Wang Ya-nan Sun Chang-he Yu |
| author_facet | Yi-xuan Gao Zhi-wen Weng Hui Shao Han Bo Zhi-hui Chen Meng Song Lu-ping Liu Ling-yun Zhang Jia-yu Liu Yu-han Wang Meng-meng Zhang Xi-you Wang Ya-nan Sun Chang-he Yu Xi-you Wang Ya-nan Sun Chang-he Yu |
| author_sort | Yi-xuan Gao |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract The Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) has been translated and validated in multiple languages but few people have verified the measurement performance of the Chinese version of Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (Ch-ZCQ). The purpose of this study is to assess the performance of the Ch-ZCQ in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) patients undergoing non-surgical treatment. It includes the reliability, validity, responsiveness and minimally clinical important difference (MCID) of the two dimensions of symptom severity (SS) and physical function (PF). The results shows that the internal consistency and test-retest reliability were good. The content validity index was 0.764. The structural validity was good and moderate suitability. The correlation between the two dimensions of ZCQ is good, which is strongly correlated with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and moderately correlated with 12-item Short Form Health Survey Version 2(SF-12v2). Discriminative validity had significant differences in the degree of classification. The ZCQ’s SS and PF dimensions demonstrated a moderate Effect Size (ES) of 0.46 and 0.35. The Standardized Response Mean (SRM) was low, with values of 0.34 and 0.25. Additionally, the Change Rate (CR) was 10% for both, indicating a low level of change. MCID SS= -0.21[95% CI (-0.36, -0.05)]; MCID PF= -0.16[95% CI (-0.36, -0.03)]. This study demonstrates the Ch-ZCQ to be a reliable and valid tool, which can effectively evaluate the effectiveness of nonsurgical treatments for patients with LSS. However, to optimize its application for the Chinese population, further refinement is needed to address the ceiling/floor effects of some items. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-a5bb08d14c664bdbb40aad3fd9cfbb75 |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2045-2322 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-05-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Scientific Reports |
| spelling | doaj-art-a5bb08d14c664bdbb40aad3fd9cfbb752025-08-20T03:04:30ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222025-05-011511810.1038/s41598-025-01380-wReliability, validity and minimum clinical importance difference of the Chinese version of the Zurich claudication questionnaireYi-xuan Gao0Zhi-wen Weng1Hui Shao2Han Bo3Zhi-hui Chen4Meng Song5Lu-ping Liu6Ling-yun Zhang7Jia-yu Liu8Yu-han Wang9Meng-meng Zhang10Xi-you Wang11Ya-nan Sun12Chang-he Yu13Xi-you WangYa-nan SunChang-he YuFirst clinical college, Beijing University of Chinese MedicineTuina and pain management department, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Affiliated Dongzhimen HospitalTuina and pain management department, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Affiliated Dongzhimen HospitalTuina and pain management department, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Affiliated Dongzhimen HospitalLiaoning University of Traditional Chinese MedicineLiaoning University of Traditional Chinese MedicineTraditional Chinese medicine department, Yongshun Community Health Service CenterFirst clinical college, Beijing University of Chinese MedicineFirst clinical college, Beijing University of Chinese MedicineFirst clinical college, Beijing University of Chinese MedicineFirst clinical college, Beijing University of Chinese MedicineTuina and pain management department, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Affiliated Dongzhimen HospitalTraditional Chinese medicine department, Xuanwu Hospital Capital Medical UniversityTuina and pain management department, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine Affiliated Dongzhimen HospitalAbstract The Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ) has been translated and validated in multiple languages but few people have verified the measurement performance of the Chinese version of Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (Ch-ZCQ). The purpose of this study is to assess the performance of the Ch-ZCQ in lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) patients undergoing non-surgical treatment. It includes the reliability, validity, responsiveness and minimally clinical important difference (MCID) of the two dimensions of symptom severity (SS) and physical function (PF). The results shows that the internal consistency and test-retest reliability were good. The content validity index was 0.764. The structural validity was good and moderate suitability. The correlation between the two dimensions of ZCQ is good, which is strongly correlated with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and moderately correlated with 12-item Short Form Health Survey Version 2(SF-12v2). Discriminative validity had significant differences in the degree of classification. The ZCQ’s SS and PF dimensions demonstrated a moderate Effect Size (ES) of 0.46 and 0.35. The Standardized Response Mean (SRM) was low, with values of 0.34 and 0.25. Additionally, the Change Rate (CR) was 10% for both, indicating a low level of change. MCID SS= -0.21[95% CI (-0.36, -0.05)]; MCID PF= -0.16[95% CI (-0.36, -0.03)]. This study demonstrates the Ch-ZCQ to be a reliable and valid tool, which can effectively evaluate the effectiveness of nonsurgical treatments for patients with LSS. However, to optimize its application for the Chinese population, further refinement is needed to address the ceiling/floor effects of some items.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-01380-wThe Zurich claudication questionnaireSpinal stenosisReliabilityValidityResponsiveness |
| spellingShingle | Yi-xuan Gao Zhi-wen Weng Hui Shao Han Bo Zhi-hui Chen Meng Song Lu-ping Liu Ling-yun Zhang Jia-yu Liu Yu-han Wang Meng-meng Zhang Xi-you Wang Ya-nan Sun Chang-he Yu Xi-you Wang Ya-nan Sun Chang-he Yu Reliability, validity and minimum clinical importance difference of the Chinese version of the Zurich claudication questionnaire Scientific Reports The Zurich claudication questionnaire Spinal stenosis Reliability Validity Responsiveness |
| title | Reliability, validity and minimum clinical importance difference of the Chinese version of the Zurich claudication questionnaire |
| title_full | Reliability, validity and minimum clinical importance difference of the Chinese version of the Zurich claudication questionnaire |
| title_fullStr | Reliability, validity and minimum clinical importance difference of the Chinese version of the Zurich claudication questionnaire |
| title_full_unstemmed | Reliability, validity and minimum clinical importance difference of the Chinese version of the Zurich claudication questionnaire |
| title_short | Reliability, validity and minimum clinical importance difference of the Chinese version of the Zurich claudication questionnaire |
| title_sort | reliability validity and minimum clinical importance difference of the chinese version of the zurich claudication questionnaire |
| topic | The Zurich claudication questionnaire Spinal stenosis Reliability Validity Responsiveness |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-01380-w |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT yixuangao reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT zhiwenweng reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT huishao reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT hanbo reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT zhihuichen reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT mengsong reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT lupingliu reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT lingyunzhang reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT jiayuliu reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT yuhanwang reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT mengmengzhang reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT xiyouwang reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT yanansun reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT changheyu reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT xiyouwang reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT yanansun reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire AT changheyu reliabilityvalidityandminimumclinicalimportancedifferenceofthechineseversionofthezurichclaudicationquestionnaire |