Identifying and quantifying the location of pain may be important for understanding specific functional impairments in elderly populations. The purpose of the present analysis was two-fold: first, to describe the reliability of a scoring method for the McGill Pain Map (MPM), and second, to validate the method of scoring the MPM as a tool for assessing areas of body pain in an epidemiologic study. In interviews performed at the subjects' homes, 411 community dwelling Mexican-American and non-Hispanic white subjects aged 65-74 from the San Antonio Longitudinal Study of Aging (SALSA) were asked to describe the location of their pain on the map of the human body included in the McGill Pain Questionnaire. The location of pain was scored by overlaying the survey figures with a MPM template divided into 36 anatomical areas. Inter- and intra-rater agreement among three raters was measured by calculating a kappa statistic for each of the body areas, and an intraclass correlation coefficient for the total number of painful areas (NPA). Internal validity was measured by Spearman's rho between the NPA and the Present Pain Index (PPI) and Pain Rating Index (PRI) of the McGill Pain Questionnaire, and external validity by correlation between NPA and the Perceived Health (PH), Amount of Bodily Pain (APB), and Pain Interference with Work (PIW) items of the Medical Outcomes Study, and the Perceived Physical Health (PPH) question of the San Antonio Heart Study. Average inter-rater agreement for individual MPM areas was 0.92 +/- 0.01, and average agreement for NPA was 0.96 +/- 0.01. Intra-rater agreement for individual areas averaged 0.94 +/- 0.01, and for NPA = 0.99 +/- 0.001. Pain in one or more areas was present in 47.7% of the subjects. For the whole sample, correlations between NPA and the validation indices were: PPI (0.91), PRI (0.89), PH (0.25), ABP (0.64), PIW (0.49), and PPH (0.20). Among the 196 subjects with pain, correlations were: PPI (0.34), PRI (0.34), PH (0.19), ABP (0.21), PIW (0.38), and PPH (0.19)-p < 0.01 for all correlations. In conclusion, we have developed a reliable method of scoring the MPM and have shown evidence of its validity in a community-based sample of elderly subjects. Patterns of painful body areas may be associated with specific diseases and functional impairments.

OBJECTIVE

To cross-culturally adapt the Hearing Handicap Inventory for the Elderly-Screening Version (HHIE-S) for use with older Spanish-speaking Mexican Americans.

METHODS

Two different samples were used. First, a convenience sample of 100 older community-dwelling Mexican American men and women in San Antonio, Texas, was used to test technical equivalence of the Spanish and English language versions of the HHIE-S. Second, a neighborhood-based sample of older Mexican Americans was used to establish conceptual (n = 433) and criterion equivalence (n = 381) of the two HHIE-S language versions.

METHODS

Independent forward and back translations were done to create a Spanish language version of the HHIE-S. In the convenience sample, subjects were administered the English and Spanish HHIE-S in random order on separate days. In the neighborhood sample, the HHIE-S was given on one occasion in the language of the subject's preference. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Geriatric Depression scale to see if the two language versions of the HHIE-S were similarly associated with depression (conceptual equivalence). Hearing impairment was assessed using the Welch-Allyn Audioscope to see if the two language versions were similarly associated with an audiometric measure for hearing loss (criterion equivalence).

RESULTS

In the convenience sample, the overall mean (SD) Spanish and English HHIE-S scores were 6.2 (8.7) and 6.2 (9.3), respectively (P = 1.00). Total scores of the English and Spanish versions were highly correlated (r = .89), and regression analysis indicated that the two language versions gave nearly identical results. In the neighborhood-based sample, men had higher HHIE-S scores than women (OR 2.0, 95% CI = 1.3-3.5). Having depressive symptoms (OR 3.2, 95% CI = 1.9-5.5) or hearing impairment (OR 6.1, 95% CI = 3.5-10.5) was associated with higher HHIE-S scores. After adjustment for gender, depressive symptoms, and/or hearing impairment, the language of interview was not associated with HHIE-S score.

CONCLUSIONS

We have developed and tested a Spanish translation of the HHIE-S that yields equivalent results to those obtained with the English version in bilingual Mexican Americans. The Spanish HHIE-S presented here is suitable for clinical use and research studies involving older Mexican Americans.

Differences in perceived caregiver availability were examined among a random sample of Mexican American (MA) and non-Hispanic white (NHW) young-old residents (58-74 years old) in three socioeconomically distinct neighborhoods in San Antonio, Texas. For MAs across all three socioeconomic status (SES) groups, being female, widowed, and having more chronic illnesses were associated with a lesser likelihood of perceived caregiver availability. SES and number of children were not associated with perceived caregiver availability. Among MAs and NHWs of middle- and upper-SES, being male, married, and of upper-SES were associated with a greater likelihood of perceived caregiver availability. The number of children modified the associations of both SES and ethnic group with perceived caregiver availability.

OBJECTIVE

While the standardized lower extremity physical performance battery (LEPPB) is widely used to measure lower body functional limitation, no corresponding measure has been developed for upper body functional limitation. We combined three standard measures (William's Hand Test, Hand Signature, Functional Reach) to develop an upper extremity physical performance battery (UEPPB) analogous to the LEPPB, and examined its validity.

METHODS

We used baseline data from a community-dwelling cohort of 749 Mexican American and European American elders and combined times to complete the William's Hand Board, Hand Signature, and distance on Functional Reach into a single composite measure, using scoring methods analogous to those for the LEPPB. We summarize concurrent, discriminant, and construct validity evidence for the UEPPB, based on observed associations with established measures of physical functional limitation, disability, and dependence.

RESULTS

All correlations were in the expected direction. Shared variance with self-reported upper and lower extremity functional limitation was 10 and 5%, respectively, and with self-reported ADL disability, ADL dependency, and IADL dependency it was 32, 26, and 31%, respectively. In multivariate models of self-reported and performance-based disability and dependency, the UEPPB and LEPPB made significant, independent contributions and, net of contextual variables (age, sex, ethnic group, education, income) explained 4 to 10% of the variance in disability and dependency.

CONCLUSIONS

The UEPPB is a valid performance-based measure of upper extremity functional limitation and makes an independent contribution beyond LEPPB in explaining disability and dependence.