Development and validation of the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale – Brazilian version

• Published in: Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria Vol. 75; no. 1; pp. 44 - 49
• Main Authors: Nunes, Ana Letícia Santos, Filgueiras, Alberto, Nicolato, Rodrigo, Alvarenga, Jussara Mendonça, Silveira, Luciana Angélica Silva, Silva, Rafael Assis da, Cheniaux, Elie
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda 01-01-2017; Academia Brasileira de Neurologia - ABNEURO; Academia Brasileira de Neurologia (ABNEURO)
• Subjects: Brazil; Case-Control Studies; catatonia; Catatonia - diagnosis; Clinical Scales, Criteria and Tools; Cultural Characteristics; Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders; humanos; Humans; NEUROSCIENCES; psicometria; PSYCHIATRY; Psychometrics; Socioeconomic Factors; Surveys and Questionnaires; traduções; Translations; Brazil; translations; traduções; catatonia; psychometrics; psicometria; humans; humanos
• ISSN: 0004-282X; 1678-4227; 1678-4227; 0004-282X
• DOI: 10.1590/0004-282X20160168

ABSTRACT
Objective:
This article aims to describe the adaptation and translation process of the Bush-Francis Catatonia Rating Scale (BFCRS) and its reduced version, the Bush-Francis Catatonia Screening Instrument (BFCSI) for Brazilian Portuguese, as well as its validation.
Methods:
Semantic equivalence processes included four steps: translation, back translation, evaluation of semantic equivalence and a pilot-study. Validation consisted of simultaneous applications of the instrument in Portuguese by two examiners in 30 catatonic and 30 non-catatonic patients.
Results:
Total scores averaged 20.07 for the complete scale and 7.80 for its reduced version among catatonic patients, compared with 0.47 and 0.20 among non-catatonic patients, respectively. Overall values of inter-rater reliability of the instruments were 0.97 for the BFCSI and 0.96 for the BFCRS.
Conclusion:
The scale's version in Portuguese proved to be valid and was able to distinguish between catatonic and non-catatonic patients. It was also reliable, with inter-evaluator reliability indexes as high as those of the original instrument.