Abstract Background Health-related control and self-efficacy beliefs can be assessed in the general population using Multidimensional Health Locus of Control-A subscales (MHLC-A) and the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES), respectively. Objective To test construct validity, internal consistency, reliability (test-retest) and ceiling and floor effects of Portuguese-Brazil versions of MHLC-A and GSES. Method Civil servants (N=2901) enrolled in a large Brazilian cohort were included. A new version of the GSES was produced (GSES-Brazil). Procedures for cross-cultural adaptation and testing of psychometric properties followed well-accepted international guidelines. Results Confirmatory factor analyses yielded the following indices: MHLC-A (tridimensional model): χ2[df]=223.45[132], p-value <0.01; CFI=0.87; TLI=0.85; RMSEA=0.07 (0.07-0.08); WRMR=3.00. GSES-Brazil (unidimensional model): χ2[df]=788.60[35], p-value <0.01; CFI=0.95; TLI=0.94; RMSEA=0.09 (0.08-0.09); WRMR=2.50. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients and Intraclass Correlation Coefficients (ICC2,1) ranged from 0.57 (0.54-0.59) and 0.57 (0.47-0.65) for MHLC-A internality to 0.80 (0.79-0.81) and 0.71 (0.66-0.77) for GSES-Brazil, respectively. There was no evidence of ceiling and floor effects. Convergent validity analyses provided further support for construct validity of both scales. Conclusion These findings support the use of the newly developed version of GSES-Brazil for the assessment of general self-efficacy of adult Brazilians. Internal consistency was lower than ideal for MHLC-A, indicating these subscales may need further refinements to provide a more psychometrically sound measure of control beliefs.

OBJETIVOS: Avaliar as atitudes e crenças de fisioterapeutas brasileiros sobre a dor lombar crônica e identificar características sociodemográficas que as influenciam. MÉTODOS: Este estudo transversal incluiu 100 fisioterapeutas brasileiros que atendem pacientes com dor lombar crônica em sua rotina clínica. As atitudes e crenças foram avaliadas pela Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS.PT) e Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS). Foram construídos modelos de regressão linear multivariada para verificar as possíveis características sociodemográficas que poderiam estar associadas com as atitudes e crenças dos fisioterapeutas. RESULTADOS: Os escores médios dos fatores biomédico e comportamental da PABS.PT foram 27,06 (DP 7,19) e 24,34 (DP 6,31), respectivamente, e o escore médio da HC-PAIRS foi 45,45 (DP 10,45). O escore do PABS.PT Fator biomédico foi associado com gênero e anos de experiência profissional. Já o escore do PABS.PT Fator comportamental não foi associado com nenhuma variável. O escore do HC-PAIRS foi significativamente associado com o número de pacientes com dor lombar atendido por mês. Esses resultados indicam que fisioterapeutas experientes tendem a seguir uma abordagem biomédica no tratamento de pacientes com dor lombar crônica. Além disso, quanto menor a experiência profissional, mais forte é a crença na relação entre dor e incapacidade. CONCLUSÕES: Os fisioterapeutas brasileiros mostram-se incertos acerca dos fatores que envolvem o desenvolvimento e a manutenção da dor lombar crônica e também sobre a relação entre dor e incapacidade nesses pacientes. Isso põe em questão as atitudes e práticas em relação ao manejo dos pacientes com dor lombar crônica no Brasil.

OBJECTIVES: To measure the attitudes and beliefs of Brazilian physical therapists about chronic low back pain and to identify the sociodemographic characteristics that are more likely to influence these attitudes and beliefs. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study with 100 Brazilian physical therapists who routinely work with chronic low back pain patients. The attitudes and beliefs were measured by the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS.PT) and the Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS). Multivariate linear regression models were built to identify sociodemographic characteristics that could be associated with physical therapists' attitudes and beliefs. RESULTS: Mean scores on the biomedical and biopsychosocial factors of PABS.PT were 27.06 (SD 7.19) and 24.34 (SD 6.31), respectively, and the mean score on HC-PAIRS was 45.45 (SD 10.45). The score on PABS.PTbiomedical was associated with gender and years of professional experience. No variable was associated with the score on PABS.PTbiopsychosocial. The score on HC-PAIRS was significantly associated with the number of back pain patients seen by the physical therapist each month. These results indicate that male and less experienced physical therapists tend to follow a biomedical approach to the treatment of chronic low back pain patients, and that the lower the professional experience the stronger the belief in the relationship between pain and disability. CONCLUSIONS: Brazilian physical therapists are uncertain of the factors involved in the development and maintenance of chronic low back pain and about the relationship between pain and disability in these patients.

CONTEXTUALIZAÇÃO: Não existem instrumentos clinimetricamente testados que mensuram atitudes e crenças de profissionais de saúde sobre a dor lombar crônica no Brasil. OBJETIVOS: Traduzir e adaptar transculturalmente a escala Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS.PT) para o português-brasileiro e avaliar as propriedades clinimétricas das versões em português-brasileiro da Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS) e da PABS.PT. MÉTODOS: A PABS.PT foi adaptada transculturalmente seguindo recomendações das diretrizes existentes. Em seguida, as versões em português-brasileiro da PABS.PT e da HC-PAIRS foram clinimetricamente testadas em 100 fisioterapeutas que rotineiramente trabalhavam com pacientes portadores de dor lombar em sua prática clínica. A consistência interna, validade do construto e efeitos de teto e piso foram testados utilizando somente as respostas dos participantes na linha de base do estudo, e a reprodutibilidade foi testada em um delineamento de teste-reteste com intervalo de sete dias. RESULTADOS: Os instrumentos apresentaram valores adequados de consistência interna (Alfa de Cronbach variando entre 0,67 e 0,74). Sua reprodutibilidade variou de moderada a substancial (Coeficiente de Correlação Intraclasse tipo 2,1 variando entre 0,70 e 0,84; Erro-Padrão da Medida variando entre 3,48 e 5,06). Os índices de correlação entre os instrumentos variaram de fraco a moderado (Índice de Correlação de Pearson variando entre 0,19 e 0,62). Não foram detectados efeitos de teto e piso nos instrumentos. CONCLUSÕES: Os resultados do presente estudo indicam que ambas as escalas PABS.PT e HC-PAIRS são instrumentos reprodutíveis para mensurar as atitudes e crenças relacionadas à dor lombar crônica em profissionais de saúde brasileiros.

BACKGROUND: There are no clinimetrically tested instruments for measuring attitudes and beliefs of health care providers with regards to chronic low back pain in Brazil. OBJECTIVES: To translate and cross-culturally adapt the Pain Attitudes and Beliefs Scale for Physiotherapists (PABS.PT) into Brazilian-Portuguese and to test the clinimetric properties of the Brazilian-Portuguese versions of the Health Care Providers' Pain and Impairment Relationship Scale (HC-PAIRS) and the PABS.PT. METHODS: The PABS.PT was cross-culturally adapted following the recommendations of current guidelines. The PABS.PT and the HC-PAIRS were clinimetrically tested in 100 physical therapists who routinely treat patients with low back pain in their clinical practice. The internal consistency, construct validity and ceiling and floor effects were tested using only baseline values from the participants while reproducibility was evaluated in a test-retest design with a seven-day interval. RESULTS: Both scales demonstrated adequate levels of internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha ranging from 0.67 to 0.74). Their reproducibility ranged from moderate to substantial (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient2,1 ranging from 0.70 to 0.84; Standard Error of the Measurement ranging from 3.48 to 5.06). The validity coefficients of the scales ranged from weak to moderate (Pearson's correlation coefficient ranging from 0.19 to 0.62). No ceiling or floor effects were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study indicate that both PABS.PT and HC-PAIRS are reproducible scales for the measurement of attitudes and beliefs towards chronic low back pain in Brazilian physical therapists.