# Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Sensory‐Motor Dysfunction Questionnaire

## TL;DR

This study confirms that the Turkish version of a questionnaire for assessing sensorimotor dysfunction is valid and reliable for people with spine pain.

## Contribution

The paper provides a validated and reliable Turkish version of the sensory-motor dysfunction questionnaire for clinical use.

## Key findings

- The SMD-Q-TR showed high internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.85) and good test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.749).
- The questionnaire demonstrated structural validity based on confirmatory factor analysis.
- Moderate to weak positive correlations were found between the SMD-Q-TR and other pain/discomfort measures.

## Abstract

This study aimed to investigate the validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the sensory‐motor dysfunction questionnaire (SMD‐Q‐TR) in individuals with spine pain.

This methodological study included 133 individuals. The 12‐question SMD‐Q developed to assess sensorimotor dysfunction was translated in accordance with international standards. Pain intensity (neck, low back, back) with the visual analog scale (VAS) and musculoskeletal disorders with the Cornell Musculoskeletal System Discomfort Survey (Cornell) were assessed. For reliability analysis, test–retest reliability with intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and internal consistency with Cronbach's α value were assessed. For validity analysis, construct and criterion validity analyses were determined with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and correlation tests between the VAS and the Cornell scores, respectively.

The Cronbach's α value of the SMD‐Q‐TR was found to be 0.85. The ICC was also found to be 0.749. According to CFA, it was determined that the model‐data fit was high and therefore it had structural validity. Moreover, weak positive correlations were found between the total score of the SMD‐Q‐TR and the Cornell‐neck/back/spine scores (rho = 0.281; p = 0.001, rho = 0.215; p = 0.013, rho = 0.368; p < 0.001, respectively), whereas moderate and positive correlations were found between the Cornell‐low back/whole body scores (rho = 0.422; p < 0.001, rho = 0.408; p < 0.001, respectively). In addition, weak, positive correlations were found between the SMD‐Q‐TR total score and the VAS‐neck/low back/back scores (rho = 0.202; p = 0.020, rho = 0.317; p < 0.001, rho = 0.209; p = 0.016, respectively).

The SMD‐Q‐TR was found to be valid and reliable in individuals with spine pain. The use of the scale in clinics may contribute to the early evaluation of sensorimotor disorders seen in spinal problems and to direct patients to appropriate preventive and therapeutic methods. In future studies, the sensitivity, minimal clinical significance value, and cut‐off score of the SMD‐Q‐TR can be calculated.

This graphical abstract summarizes the purpose, methodology, key findings, and conclusions of the validity and reliability study of the Turkish version of the sensory‐motor dysfunction questionnaire (SMD‐Q‐TR).