Dutch Translation and Validation of the Headache-Specific Locus of Control Scale (HSLC-DV)

Background and Objective. The assessment of locus of control forms an important part of headache treatment, and there is need to adapting them to the Dutch population. Methods. Forward-backward translation was used to obtain the Headache-Specific Locus of Control Scale-Dutch Version (HSLC-DV). The response of 87 participants with migraine, tension-type headache, and cervicogenic headache, aged between 18 and 55 years (75% female), is used. Test-retest reliability was measured by intraclass correlations. Construct validity was assessed by correlations with corresponding domains of the Pain Coping and Cognition List (PCCL) and by confirmation of known groups hypotheses. Structural validity was evaluated by factor analysis (principal axis factoring). Results. The intraclass correlations for the External, Internal, and Chance domains were 0.79, 0.89, and 0.73, respectively. Internal consistencies for domains exceeded 0.73 and were similar to those observed in the original study. Convergent correlations were as expected and three of the seven known groups hypotheses were confirmed. Structural validity was supported by results of the factor analysis that matched the proposed structure of the original instrument. Conclusions. The HSLC-DV is a valid and reliable questionnaire for measuring the locus of control

Diagnostic accuracy of upper cervical spine instability test: A systematic review

BACKGROUND: Patients with neck pain, headache, torticollis, or neurological signs should be screened carefully for upper cervical spine instability, as these conditions are "red flags" for applying physical therapy interventions. However, little is known about the diagnostic accuracy of upper cervical spine instability tests.\n\nPURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of upper cervical spine instability screening tests in patients or people who are healthy.\n\nDATA SOURCES: PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, and RECAL Legacy databases were searched from their inception through October 2012.\n\nSTUDY SELECTION: Studies were included that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of upper cervical instability screening tests in patients or people who are healthy and in which sensitivity and specificity were reported or could be calculated using a 2 × 2 table.\n\nDATA EXTRACTION AND QUALITY ASSESSMENT: Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and the methodological quality assessment using the QUADAS-2.\n\nDATA SYNTHESIS: Depending on heterogeneity, statistical pooling was performed. All diagnostic parameters (sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratios) were recalculated, if possible.\n\nRESULTS: Five studies were included in this systematic review. Statistical pooling was not possible due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Specificity of 7 tests was sufficient, but sensitivity varied. Predictive values were variable. Likelihood ratios also were variable, and, in most cases, the confidence intervals were large.\n\nLIMITATIONS: The included studies suffered from several biases. None of the studies evaluated upper cervical spine instability tests in patients receiving primary care.\n\nCONCLUSIONS: The membranes tests had the best diagnostic accuracy, but their applicability as a test for diagnosing upper cervical spine instability in primary care has yet to be confirmed