Objective  To systematically evaluate the methodological and measurement properties quality of kinesiophobia assessment tools in Chinese patients with chronic pain, and to provide a reference for clinical staff to choose the tools.

Methods  CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, VIP, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library were searched to collect studies on assessment tools for kinesiophobia in patients with chronic pain from the construction of the databases to March 2024. Quality evaluation of assessment tools in the included studies was performed based on the Consensus-based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines.

Results  A total of 10 studies were included and 13 kinesiophobia assessment tools were constructed. Two assessment tools had “adequate” content validity, three had “inadequate” content validity, and the rest were “uncertain”. All assessment tools were evaluated for construct validity using factor analysis, five of which could not provide specific values and therefore had “inadequate” measurement properties, and the rest had “uncertain” measurement properties. Twelve assessment tools were evaluated for internal consistency, with methodological quality of “good” and measurement properties of “adequate”. In the end, one assessment tool was recommended at level A, ten were recommended at level B and two were recommended at level C.

Conclusion  The FABQ-HK has the best measurement property and the highest level of recommendation, but in view of the differences in language habits between the two sides of the Chinese Taiwan Strait, in order to evaluate its validity more comprehensively, it is necessary to collect more research evidence on this assessment tool in Chinese mainland populations.

1.Vlaeyen JW, Kole-Snijders AM, Rotteveel AM, et al. The role of fear of movement/ (re) injury in pain disability[J]. J Occup Rehabil, 1995, 5(4): 235-252. DOI: 10.1007/BF02109988.

2.Scholich SL, Hallner D, Wittenberg RH, et al. The relationship between pain, disability, quality of life and cognitive behavioural factors in chronic back pain[J]. Disabil Rehabil, 2012, 34(23): 1993-2000. DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2012.667187.

3.Vlaeyen JWS, Seelen HAM, Peters M, et al. Fear of movement/ (re) injury and muscular reactivity in chronic low back pain patients: an experimental investigation[J]. Pain, 1999, 82(3): 297-304. DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3959(99)00054-8.

4.Roelofs J, Peters ML, Patijn J, et al. Electronic diary assessment of pain-related fear, attention to pain, and pain intensity in chronic low back pain patients[J]. Pain, 2004, 112(3): 335-342. DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2004.09.016.

5.Miller RP, Kori SH, Todd DD. The Tampa Scale: a measure of kinisophobia[J]. The Clinical Journal of Pain, 1991, 7(1): 51. DOI: 10.1097/00002508-199103000-00053.

6.Waddell G, Newton M, Henderson I, et al. A Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire (FABQ) and the role of fear-avoidance beliefs in chronic low back pain and disability[J]. Pain, 1993, 52(2): 157-168. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(93)90127-B.

7.Knapik A, Saulicz E, Gnat R. Kinesiophobia-introducing a new diagnostic tool[J]. J Hum Kinet, 2011, 28: 25-31. DOI: 10.2478/v10078-011-0019-8.

8.Prinsen CAC, Mokkink LB, Bouter LM, et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures[J]. Qual Life Res, 2018, 27(5): 1147-1157. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-018-1798-3.

9.Mokkink LB, de Vet HCW, Prinsen CAC, et al. COSMIN risk of bias checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures[J]. Qual Life Res, 2018, 27(5): 1171-1179. DOI: 10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4.

10.高云, 赵俊峰, 李豪, 等. COSMIN内容效度评价指南解读——以移动健康信息搜索行为问卷为例[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2020, 40(7): 1536-1541. [Gao Y, Zhao JF, Li H, et al. Interpretation of COSMIN content validity evaluation guidelines-taking the mobile health information search behaviour questionnaire as an example[J]. Chinese Journal of Gerontology, 2020, 40(7): 1536-1541.] DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1005-9202.2020.07.056.

11.严雪, 刘倩倩, 苏予洁, 等. 基于COSMIN指南对癌症患者支持性照护需求量表的系统评价[J]. 中国全科医学, 2022, 25(4): 408-415. [Yan X, Liu QQ, Su YJ, et al. A systematic review of universal supportive care needs scale for cancer patients based on COSMIN guidelines[J]. Chinese General Practice, 2022, 25(4): 408-415.] DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2021.00.349.

12.Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires[J]. J Clin Epidemiol, 2007, 60(1): 34-42. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.

13.陈祎婷, 沈蓝君, 彭健, 等. 改良版定量系统评价证据分级方法对患者报告结局测量工具的评价[J]. 解放军护理杂志, 2020, 37(10): 57-60. [Chen YT, Shen LJ, Peng J, et al. Modified GRADE evaluation of COSMIN method for patient reported outcome measures[J]. Military Nursing, 2020, 37(10): 57-60.] DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-9993.2020.10.014.

14.Cai L, Liu Y, Woby SR, et al. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the Chinese version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia-11 among patients who have undergone total knee arthroplasty[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2019, 34(6): 1116-1121. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.01.076.

15.Wong WS, Kwok HY, Luk KD, et al. Fear of movement/ (re) injury in Chinese patients with chronic pain: factorial validity of the Chinese version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia[J]. J Rehabil Med, 2010, 42(7): 620-629. DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0575.

16.He S, Wang J, Ji P. Validation of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia for Temporomandibular Disorders (TSK-TMD) in patients with painful TMD[J]. J Headache Pain, 2016, 17(1): 109. DOI: 10.1186/s10194-016-0706-x.

17.Wei X, Xu X, Zhao Y, et al. The Chinese version of the Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia was cross-culturally adapted and validated in patients with low back pain[J]. J Clin Epidemiol, 2015, 68(10): 1205-1212. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.07.003.

18.胡文. 简体中文版TSK和FABQ量表的文化调适及其在退行性腰腿痛中的应用研究[D]. 上海：第二军医大学, 2012. [Hu W. Cross-culture adaptation of simplified Chinese version of TSK/FABQ, and its clinical application in the assessment of fear avoidance for patients with low back pain[D]. Shanghai: Second Military Medical University, 2012.] DOI: 10.7666/d.y2110748.

19.Pei LB, Xia JJ, Yan JL. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the Fear Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire[J]. J Int Med Res, 2010, 38(6): 1985-1996. DOI: 10.1177/147323001003800612.

20.汪敏, 王斌, 吴建贤. 汉译版FABQ评估腰痛患者的可靠性[J]. 安徽医药, 2010, 14(7): 794-796. [Wang  M, Wang B, Wu JX. Reliability of Chinese version of the fear-avoidance belief questionnaire for evaluating with low back pain[J]. Anhui Medical and Pharmaceutical Journal, 2010, 14(7): 794-796.] DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-6469. 2010.07.023.

21.吴建贤, 汪敏, 王斌. 中文简体版恐惧－回避信念问卷评估下背痛患者的信度及效度研究[J]. 中华物理医学与康复杂志, 2010, 32(9): 667-671. [Wu JX, Wang M, Wang B. The reliability and validity of the Chinese version of the fear-avoidance beliefs questionnaire for evaluating patients with lower back pain[J]. Chinese Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 2010, 32(9): 667-671.] DO1: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-1424.201009.010.

22.Lee KC, Chiu TT, Lam TH. Psychometric properties of the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire in patients with neck pain[J]. Clin Rehabil, 2006, 20(10): 909-920. DOI: 10.1177/026921550506072186.

23.朱慧, 张丹妮, 金孔军, 等. 恐动症成因分析量表的汉化及信效度检验[J]. 解放军护理杂志, 2020, 37(1): 1-4. [Zhu H, Zhang DN, Jin KJ, et al. The reliability and validity of the Chinese Version of Kinesiophobia Causes Scale[J]. Military Nursing, 2020, 37(1): 1-4.] DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1008-9993.2020.01.001.

24.沈蓝君, 彭健, 陈祎婷, 等. COSMIN方法介绍：评价患者报告结局测量工具内容效度的评分系统[J]. 循证护理, 2021, 7(5): 609-614. [Shen LJ, Peng J, Chen YT, et al. COSMIN methodology introduction: rating system for evaluating the content validity of patient-reported outcome measures[J]. Chinese Evidence-based Nursing, 2021, 7(5): 609-614.] DOI: 10.12102/j.issn.2095-8668.2021.05.007.  

25.刘昊为, 黄丽, 杨宗乾, 等. 常用恐动症评估量表的研究进展[J]. 中国康复医学杂志, 2023, 38(9): 1305-1310. [Liu HW, Huang Li, Yang ZQ, et al. Research progress of commonly used assessment scales for agoraphobia[J]. Chinese Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 2023, 38(9): 1305-1310.] DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-1242.2023.09.023.