Biddy A Unsworth

Publications (2)4.59 Total impact

• Article: Translation and Linguistic Validation of the Self-Completed Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-LANSS) Scale for Use in a Libyan Population.

  Raga A Elzahaf, Osama A Tashani, Biddy A Unsworth, Mark I Johnson
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: Background:  The Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) pain scale is used to identify pain of neuropathic origin and has been validated as a self-completed tool (S-LANSS). We translated the S-LANSS into Arabic and evaluated its reliability and linguistic validity for use by Libyan people. Methods:  Thirteen of 45 Libyan nationals living in the UK were identified as having chronic pain and completed an English and Arabic S-LANSS 1 week apart. In addition, 23 of 104 respondents to a telephone interview in Derna City, Libya, were identified as having chronic pain and completed the Arabic S-LANSS. Seven of these 23 completed the S-LANSS again 1 week later. Results:  Cronbach's alpha was 0.72 (P < 0.001) for the Arabic S-LANSS and 0.71 (P < 0.001) for the English S-LANSS. There was good measurement of agreement of individual items in Arabic and English S-LANSS tools with kappa coefficients ranging from 0.69 to 1.00. Twelve of the 23 (52.2%) individuals with chronic pain scored 12 or more on the Arabic S-LANSS and were classified as possibly having neuropathic pain. There was good measurement of agreement of individual items in Arabic S-LANSS tools with kappa coefficients ranging from 0.462 to 1.00. There were strong intraclass correlations in both versions for test-retest reliability of total score. Conclusion:  The Arabic S-LANSS is reliable and linguistically valid to use in Libya. Perspective: Our translation of the S-LANSS into Arabic was shown to be linguistically valid and reliable for use in a Libyan population.
  Pain Practice 06/2012; · 2.21 Impact Factor
• Article: The prevalence of chronic pain with an analysis of countries with a Human Development Index less than 0.9: a systematic review without meta-analysis.

  Raga A Elzahaf, Osama A Tashani, Biddy A Unsworth, Mark I Johnson
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: To date, there are no systematic reviews of epidemiological studies of chronic pain in the developing world. To estimate the prevalence of chronic pain worldwide paying particular attention to data from countries with a Human Development Index (HDI) of less than 0.9. A literature search was conducted for cross-sectional surveys of chronic pain (≥3 months) in the adult general population using Medline, Embase, CINAHL, SportDiscus, Sciencedirect, CAS ILLUMINA, Academic search complete, PsycINFO and AMED. Forty-eight studies were identified and 29 of these were excluded because they surveyed children, the elderly or were longitudinal studies. Weighted mean ± SD prevalence of chronic pain worldwide was 30.3% ± 11.7% (19 studies, 65 surveys, 34 countries, 182,019 respondents). There was no correlation between HDI and prevalence. In countries with a HDI < 0.9 prevalence was 33.9% ± 14.5% and significantly higher than prevalence in countries with a HDI of ≥0.9 (29.9% ± 12.7%), although removal of a large study that may have included a sample of individuals with comorbidities reduced the worldwide estimate to 28.0% ± 11.8% (47 surveys, 33 countries, 139,770 participants). Interestingly, the estimate of countries with a HDI < 0.9 to 24.8% ± 8.9% (7 surveys, 7 countries, 6122 participants) became significantly lower than the estimate of countries with a HDI ≥ 0.9 which was 28.1% ± 11.6% (40 surveys, 21 countries, 133,648 participants). The review provides further evidence that the prevalence of chronic pain in the general population is high. However, there was insufficient reliable data to estimate with any certainty the prevalence of chronic pain in countries with an HDI < 0.9 with variability in estimates between surveys being of concern. Subtle differences in review and survey methodology appeared to impact markedly on estimates. There is a need for epidemiological studies that estimate the prevalence of chronic pain in developing countries to determine the scale of the problem.
  Current Medical Research and Opinion 06/2012; 28(7):1221-9. · 2.38 Impact Factor