Validity of the Danish version of Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire in patients with persistent spinal pain

BackgroundPatients with persistent spinal pain often have comorbidities, increasing treatment burden. The Danish MTBQ-DK measures this burden, but its validity in this population is unknown.ObjectiveEvaluate the construct validity, internal consistency, convergent validity, and discriminative ability of the MTBQ-DK in patients with persistent spinal pain.MethodsPatients (n = 360) referred to the Department of Rheumatology, Aalborg University Hospital were included and completed self-report questionnaires, including the MTBQ-DK, PHQ-2, GAD-2, EQ-5D-5L (incl. EQ-VAS), and demographic items such as education and BMI. Clinical data were extracted from patient records, including ICD-10 diagnosis codes (used to determine number of chronic conditions and healthcare utilization) and use of pain medication. Construct validity was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis, and ordered logistic regression examined associations across treatment burden categories. Convergent validity, internal consistency and questionnaire properties were examined as well.ResultsA modified CFA supported the construct validity of the MTBQ-DK. In the ordered logistic regression, individuals with higher BMI (OR = 1.28, p = 0.02) and a greater number of ICD-10 diagnosis codes (OR = 1.07, p = 0.01) had significantly increased odds of being classified into a higher treatment burden category, compared to those with no reported treatment burden. Conversely, individuals not using pain medication had lower odds of being in a higher burden group (OR = 0.26, p < 0.01). These results indicate that the MTBQ-DK burden categories meaningfully differentiate between patient subgroups. Convergent validity showed fair correlations with PHQ-2 (ρ = 0.36), GAD-2 (ρ = 0.40), and chronic disease count (ρ = 0.28) (all p < 0.001). Negative correlations were found with EQ-5D-5L (ρ = -0.44) and EQ-VAS (ρ = -0.46) (both p < 0.001). Internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's α = 0.85). A floor effect ranged from 33.2% to 70.6%.ConclusionThe MTBQ-DK demonstrates acceptable validity for assessing treatment burden in patients with persistent spinal pain. Construct validity was supported by confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency was acceptable, and convergent validity showed expected correlations. Ordered logistic regression confirmed meaningful differentiation between treatment burden groups, highlighting its potential as a tool to identify patients needing additional support.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation
Published
2025-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10538127251386968
Primary Topic
Chronic Disease Management Strategies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Validity of the Danish version of Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire in patients with persistent spinal pain

Jonathan Vela, Þorvaldur Skúli Pálsson, Jacob S. Gandløse
Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation
Chronic Disease Management Strategies
article

Validity of the Danish version of Multimorbidity Treatment Burden Questionnaire in patients with persistent spinal pain

Jonathan Vela, Þorvaldur Skúli Pálsson, Jacob S. Gandløse
article en

Abstract

BackgroundPatients with persistent spinal pain often have comorbidities, increasing treatment burden. The Danish MTBQ-DK measures this burden, but its validity in this population is unknown.ObjectiveEvaluate the construct validity, internal consistency, convergent validity, and discriminative ability of the MTBQ-DK in patients with persistent spinal pain.MethodsPatients (n = 360) referred to the Department of Rheumatology, Aalborg University Hospital were included and completed self-report questionnaires, including the MTBQ-DK, PHQ-2, GAD-2, EQ-5D-5L (incl. EQ-VAS), and demographic items such as education and BMI. Clinical data were extracted from patient records, including ICD-10 diagnosis codes (used to determine number of chronic conditions and healthcare utilization) and use of pain medication. Construct validity was assessed using confirmatory factor analysis, and ordered logistic regression examined associations across treatment burden categories. Convergent validity, internal consistency and questionnaire properties were examined as well.ResultsA modified CFA supported the construct validity of the MTBQ-DK. In the ordered logistic regression, individuals with higher BMI (OR = 1.28, p = 0.02) and a greater number of ICD-10 diagnosis codes (OR = 1.07, p = 0.01) had significantly increased odds of being classified into a higher treatment burden category, compared to those with no reported treatment burden. Conversely, individuals not using pain medication had lower odds of being in a higher burden group (OR = 0.26, p < 0.01). These results indicate that the MTBQ-DK burden categories meaningfully differentiate between patient subgroups. Convergent validity showed fair correlations with PHQ-2 (ρ = 0.36), GAD-2 (ρ = 0.40), and chronic disease count (ρ = 0.28) (all p < 0.001). Negative correlations were found with EQ-5D-5L (ρ = -0.44) and EQ-VAS (ρ = -0.46) (both p < 0.001). Internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach's α = 0.85). A floor effect ranged from 33.2% to 70.6%.ConclusionThe MTBQ-DK demonstrates acceptable validity for assessing treatment burden in patients with persistent spinal pain. Construct validity was supported by confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency was acceptable, and convergent validity showed expected correlations. Ordered logistic regression confirmed meaningful differentiation between treatment burden groups, highlighting its potential as a tool to identify patients needing additional support.

Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal RehabilitationVol. 39(2)
Aalborg University Hospital (DK), Aalborg University (DK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 60%
Chronic Disease Management Strategies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.