Simplified Chinese Version of the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score in Evaluating Patients with Metastatic Spinal Tumor: A Cross‐Cultural Adaptation and Validation

OBJECTIVE: To translate the original English version of the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) into simplified Chinese, adapt it cross‐culturally, validate its psychometric properties in measuring spinal instability in patients with metastatic spinal tumors in the Chinese mainland, examine the reliability and validity to demonstrate its accuracy and applicability in clinical practice. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with metastatic spinal disease between January 2016 and January 2020 were recruited. The number of participants was advised to be at least 50 for appropriate analysis of reliability, construct validity, as well as ceiling or floor effects, and recruitment of 100 patients was advised for internal consistency analysis. The study was conducted in two phases: first, the SINS was translated into simplified Chinese; second, the factor structure, internal consistency, test–retest reliability, validity, and floor and ceiling effects of the SC‐SINS were assessed. The internationally recognized cross‐cultural adaptation guidelines were followed. Internal consistency was evaluated with Cronbach's alpha. Test–retest reliability was examined among the patients with a 4‐week interval. The validity of the Chinese version of SINS (SC‐SINS) was assessed by examining its relationship with Kostuik classification. Principal component analysis was conducted to confirm the factor structure of each subscale. RESULTS: A total of 160 participants (88 males and 72 females) were enrolled. No major difficulties occurred in the forward and backward translations of SINS. The internal consistency of SC‐SINS was excellent (Cronbach's α =0.857, ranging from 0.68 to 0.85). Test–retest reliability was also excellent with a value of 0.89, ranging from 0.86 to 0.95. Validity analyses indicated that the SC‐SINS was positively and significantly correlated with Kostuik classification. The correlation between “Posterolateral Involvement of Spinal Elements” and “1‐2 Partial Damage” was the highest with a correlation value of 0.792. The correlation between “Pain” and “1–2 Partial Damage” was the lowest with a value of 0.341. All items showed principal component coefficients greater than 0.4. The values of Factor 1 ranged from 0.523 to 0.681; Factor 2 ranged from 0.591 to 0.731; Factor 3 ranged from 0.613 to 0.754; Factor 4 ranged from 0.461 to 0.711; Factor 5 ranged from 0.513 to 0.701; and Factor 6 ranged from 0.501 to 0.668. In addition, neither floor nor ceiling effects were seen in the SC‐SINS. CONCLUSION: The SC‐SINS demonstrated high internal consistency and test–retest reliability, which has been proven valid and reliable to measure spinal stability in patients from the Chinese mainland with metastatic spinal tumor.