Neck Pain and Disability Scale and Neck Disability Index: validity of Dutch language versions

Purpose  

To investigate the validity of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale Dutch Language Version (NPAD-DLV) and the Neck Disability Index (NDI)-DLV.     

Translation of the Neck Disability Index and validation of the Greek version in a sample of neck pain patients

Background  

Neck pain is a highly prevalent condition resulting in major disability. Standard scales for measuring disability in patients with neck pain have a pivotal role in research and clinical settings. The Neck Disability Index (NDI) is a valid and reliable tool, designed to measure disability in activities of daily living due to neck pain. The purpose of our study was the translation and validation of the NDI in a Greek primary care population with neck complaints.     

Reliability,validity, and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale

Background  

Until recently, no Japanese versions have existed of the more popular, patient-reported disability questionnaires for neck pain. This study aimed to test the reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPDS), one of the most widely used questionnaires in patients with neck pain.     

Detecting relevant changes and responsiveness of Neck Pain and Disability Scale and Neck Disability Index

Purpose

To investigate relevant change on the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) and which questionnaire is the most responsive in patients with non-specific chronic neck pain (CNP).

Methods

Seventy-six patients with non-specific CNP in an outpatient tertiary rehabilitation setting were dichotomized into “improved” and “stable” based on global perceived effect (GPE) scores. To investigate relevant change minimal detectable change (MDC) and minimal important change (MIC) with the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) cut-off point were assessed. Comparison of responsiveness was performed using areas under the ROC curve (AUC) and correlations between change scores of NPAD and NDI, and GPE.

Results

MDC and MIC on NPAD (scale 0–100) were 31.7 and 11.5 points, respectively. MDC and MIC on NDI (scale 0–50) were 8.4 and 3.5 points, respectively. Changes should exceed this MDC or MIC cut-off to be interpreted as relevant. AUC was 0.75 for both NPAD and NDI. Correlations between change scores of NPAD and NDI, and GPE were, respectively, 0.48 (95 % CI 0.29–0.64) and 0.49 (95 % CI 0.30–0.64).

Conclusions

Relevant change on both NPAD and NDI assessed with MDC and MIC resulted in different cut-offs and consequently with different amounts of certainty that the patient is improved. Responsiveness of NPAD and NDI was similar.     

Confirmatory factory analysis of the Neck Disability Index in a general problematic neck population indicates a one-factor model

Background contextThe Neck Disability Index frequently is used to measure outcomes of the neck. The statistical rigor of the Neck Disability Index has been assessed with conflicting outcomes. To date, Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Neck Disability Index has not been reported for a suitably large population study. Because the Neck Disability Index is not a condition-specific measure of neck function, initial Confirmatory Factor Analysis should consider problematic neck patients as a homogenous group.PurposeWe sought to analyze the factor structure of the Neck Disability Index through Confirmatory Factor Analysis in a symptomatic, homogeneous, neck population, with respect to pooled populations and gender subgroups.Study designThis was a secondary analysis of pooled data.Patient sampleA total of 1,278 symptomatic neck patients (67.5% female, median age 41 years), 803 nonspecific and 475 with whiplash-associated disorder.Outcome measuresThe Neck Disability Index was used to measure outcomes.MethodsWe analyzed pooled baseline data from six independent studies of patients with neck problems who completed Neck Disability Index questionnaires at baseline. The Confirmatory Factor Analysis was considered in three scenarios: the full sample and separate sexes. Models were compared empirically for best fit.ResultsTwo-factor models have good psychometric properties across both the pooled and sex subgroups. However, according to these analyses, the one-factor solution is preferable from both a statistical perspective and parsimony. The two-factor model was close to significant for the male subgroup (p<.07) where questions separated into constructs of mental function (pain, reading headaches and concentration) and physical function (personal care, lifting, work, driving, sleep, and recreation).ConclusionsThe Neck Disability Index demonstrated a one-factor structure when analyzed by Confirmatory Factor Analysis in a pooled, homogenous sample of neck problem patients. However, a two-factor model did approach significance for male subjects where questions separated into constructs of mental and physical function. Further investigations in different conditions, subgroup and sex-specific populations are warranted.     

The association between neck pain, the Neck Disability Index and cervical ranges of motion: a narrative review

Background:

The Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Cervical Ranges of Motion (CROM) are measurement tools that are used for neck pain patients.

Objective:

To review the literature to determine how the NDI is associated with neck pain and CROM outcomes.

Methods:

Computer based searches of 5 databases were performed and supplemented by internet and hand searching of article references and “related citations.”

Results:

The search yielded 23 studies that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria and these were summarized into four categories: NDI, NDI and other questionnaires, whiplash and NDI and cervical range of motion and NDI. The NDI was shown to be a well validated and reliable self-reported questionnaire, especially when compared to other questionnaires, in both neck pain and whiplash (WAD) patients. There are very few studies that discuss the NDI and cervical range of motion.

Conclusion:

This review outlines the strength of the NDI as a self-reported neck disability questionnaire, but also demonstrates a need for further research to explore the association between the NDI, neck pain and cervical ranges of motion.     

Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the Japanese version of the Neck Disability Index

Background

The Neck Disability Index (NDI) is one of the most widely used questionnaires for neck pain. The purpose of this study was to validate the Japanese NDI.

Methods

We performed two surveys with an 8-week interval in 130 patients with neck pain, radiculopathy and myelopathy. We asked patients to answer two versions of the Japanese NDI: the original NDI, which had been completed by a forward–backward translation procedure, and the modified NDI, which has the phrase “because of neck pain” to the phase “because of neck pain or numbness in the arm.” The other parameters examined were the strength of pain and numbness, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and Short Form 36. Attending surgeons judged the symptom severity. Patients were asked to report the patient global impression of change (PGIC) at the second survey. The internal consistency, criterion-related and discriminative validity, and reliability were evaluated.

Results

The original NDI and the modified NDI were 26.9 ± 17.1 and 29.9 ± 15.5, respectively. The Cronbach α values of the original NDI and the modified NDI were 0.92 and 0.89, respectively. Both versions of the NDI had good to excellent correlative coefficients with the related domains. The modified NDI had a higher validity for numbness and mental health-related QOL. The symptom severity was significantly correlated with the modified NDI. The intraclass correlation coefficients of the two surveys of the modified and original NDI were comparable. The effect sizes of the modified and the original NDI were 0.64 and 0.55, respectively. Spearman’s ρ between the change of the NDI and the PGIC was 0.47 in the original NDI and 0.59 in the modified NDI.

Conclusions

We demonstrated the validity, reliability and responsiveness of the Japanese NDI. The modified NDI was more strongly correlated with numbness and mental health-related QOL.     

Neck Pain and Disability Scale and the Neck Disability Index: reproducibility of the Dutch Language Versions

The first aim of this study was to translate the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) from English into Dutch producing the NPAD–Dutch Language Version (DLV). The second aim was to analyze test–retest reliability and agreement of the NPAD–DLV and the Neck Disability Index (NDI)–DLV. The NPAD was translated according to established guidelines. Thirty-four patients (mean age 37.5 years, 68% female) with chronic neck pain (CNP), within an outpatient rehabilitation setting, participated in this study. The NPAD–DLV and the NDI–DLV were filled out twice with a mean test–retest interval of 18 days. The intraclass correlation coefficient of the NPAD–DLV was 0.76 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57–0.87) and of the NDI–DLV 0.84 (95% CI 0.69–0.92). The limits of agreement of the NPAD–DLV and the NDI–DLV were, respectively, ±20.9 (scale 0–100) and ±6.5 (scale 0–50). The reliability of the NPAD–DLV and the NDI–DLV was acceptable for patients with CNP. The variation (‘instability’) in the NPAD–DLV total scores was relatively large and larger than the variation of the NDI–DLV.     

Development of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale. Item analysis, face, and criterion-related validity.

STUDY DESIGN: The development and testing of a new comprehensive measure of neck pain and disability, the Neck Pain and Disability Scale. OBJECTIVES: To provide an initial evaluation of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale's reliability and validity. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although several measures exist for generalized pain and disability, none is specific for neck pain. More specific measurements should improve assessment of treatments and clinical research aimed at cervical pain syndromes. METHODS: The Neck Pain and Disability Scale was designed using the Million Visual Analogue Scale as a template and consists of 20 items that assess neck pain. In this study, 100 patients with neck pain, 52 patients with lower back and leg pain, and 27 pain-free volunteers were rated by the Neck Pain and Disability Scale. In addition, a subset of the 47 patients with neck pain were rated by several other established psychometric instruments. RESULTS: An item analysis showed a high degree of internal consistency among the 20 items on the Neck Pain and Disability Scale (r = 0.93), and face validity was established by comparing patients who had neck pain as well as lower back and leg pain with a pain-free group. The Neck Pain and Disability Scale scores correlated with the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, the Pain Disability Index, and psychological measures of depression and neuroticism. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest a highly reliable instrument for evaluating neck pain with at least four underlying dimensions. Further work to address the predictive validity of this new tool are under way.     

Normative score and cut-off value of the Neck Disability Index

BackgroundNeck pain is a common health problem that restricts activities of daily living. The Neck Disability Index (NDI) was developed to assess disability in patients with neck pain. The normative score and the cut-off value are mandatory to assess an individual patient or a certain patient group for clinically important neck pain with disability, by distinguishing it from nonsignificant pain. The objective of the present study was to determine the normative score and the cut-off value of the NDI.MethodsA total of 1,200 participants who registered with an internet research company were interviewed on the website about their episodes of neck pain during the previous 4 weeks, and completed the online NDI questionnaire. If the participants reported neck pain, they were also asked about the disability in activity of daily living it caused, and the presence of associated symptoms in upper limbs. Disability was defined according to the consensus study on the standardization of back pain definitions. The normative score was determined by calculating the mean in the participants, and the cut-off value was determined by the receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis.ResultsThe prevalence of neck pain was 37.8 %. Demographic data of the participants also indicated that they were representative of the normal population in Japan. The mean score was 6.98, and the median was 2. The NDI score was higher in middle age, and at its peak in the 50s age group (50–59 years of age). The female mean was significantly higher. The NDI score was higher in those with upper limb symptoms. We have determined the cut-off value of the NDI to detect neck pain associated with disability to be 15.ConclusionsThe normative score and the cut-off value of the NDI were determined. Our cut-off value is potentially useful in evaluating the therapeutic effectiveness of various interventions for neck pain.     

The Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia and neck pain, disability and range of motion: a narrative review of the literature

Background:

The Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia (TSK) that was developed in 1990 is a 17 item scale originally developed to measure the fear of movement related to chronic lower back pain.

Objective:

To review the literature regarding TSK and neck pain, perceived disability and range of motion of the cervical spine.

Methods:

Medline, MANTIS, Index to Chiropractic Literature and CINAHL were searched.

Results:

A total of 16 related articles were found and divided into four categories: TSK and Neck Pain; TSK, Neck Pain and Disability; TSK, Neck Pain, Disability and Strength; and TSK, Neck Pain and Surface Electromyography.

Conclusion:

The fear avoidance model can be applied to neck pain sufferers and there is value from a psychometric perspective in using the TSK to assess kinesiophobia. Future research should investigate if, and to what extent, other measureable factors commonly associated with neck pain, such as decreased range of motion, correlate with kinesiophobia.     

Sensitivity to change of the Neck Pain and Disability Scale

The Neck Pain and Disability Scale (NPAD) is a 20-item instrument to measure neck pain and related disability. The aim of this study was to assess sensitivity to change of the NPAD. A total of 411 participants from 15 general practices in the middle of Germany completed a multidimensional questionnaire including the German version of the NPAD and self-reported demographic and clinical information. Sensitivity to change was analysed by linear regression analysis of the NPAD at follow-up and educational level, age class, depression, anxiety, and deficits in social support, respectively, and by Pearson’s correlation analyses between mean change in NPAD at follow-up and mean change in prognostic markers. Those having more than basic education (regression coefficient −7.2, p < 0.001) and/or being in a younger age class (−2.9, p = 0.020) consistently reported significantly lower average NPAD scores at follow-up compared to those with basic education and/or a older age class. In contrast, those who were classified to be depressed (regression coefficient 2.1, p < 0.001), anxious (1.9, p < 0.001), or having deficits in social support (5.5, p = 0.004) reported significantly higher NPAD scores. Change in depression, anxiety, and social support scale between baseline and follow-up was significantly correlated with change in the NPAD score. Hence, these data are in the direction anticipated across all baseline factors investigated. In conclusion, the NPAD seems to be a sensitive measure for use in clinical practice and future studies of neck pain and related disability.     

Responsiveness of the Oswestry Disability Index and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire in Italian subjects with sub-acute and chronic low back pain

Introduction  

An ability to assess longitudinal changes in health status is crucial for the outcome measures used in treatment efficacy trials. The aim of this study was to verify the responsiveness of the Italian versions of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) in subjects with subacute or chronic low back pain (LBP).     

Responsiveness of the Neck Disability Index in patients with mechanical neck disorders

PurposeReport the test-retest reliability, construct validity, minimum clinically important difference (MCID), and minimal detectable change (MDC) for the Neck Disability Index (NDI).Study design/settingCohort study of patients presenting to outpatient physical therapy clinics.Patient sampleNinety-one subjects with a primary complaint of neck pain, with or without concomitant upper extremity (UE) symptoms, who were participants in a randomized clinical trial.Outcome MeasuresNDI and the 15-point Global Rating of Change (GRC) self-report measures.MethodsAll subjects completed the NDI at baseline and at a 3-week follow-up. Additionally, subjects completed the GRC scale, which was used to dichotomize patients into improved or stable groups. Changes in the NDI were used to assess test-retest reliability, construct validity, MCID, and MDC.ResultsTest-retest reliability was moderate for the NDI (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.19–0.84). For the NDI, the MCID was 7.5 points and the MDC was 10.2 points.ConclusionsThe NDI appears to demonstrate adequate responsiveness based on statistical reference criteria when used in a sample that approximates the high percentage of patients with neck pain and concomitant UE referred symptoms. Because the MCID is within the bounds of measurement error, a 10-point change (the MDC) should be used as the MCID.     

Cervical radiculopathy: a systematic review on treatment by spinal manipulation and measurement with the Neck Disability Index

Cervical radiculopathy (CR), while less common than conditions with neck pain alone, can be a significant cause of neck pain and disability; thus the determination of adequate treatment options for patients is essential. Currently, inadequate scientific literature restricts specific conservative management recommendations for CR. Despite a paucity of evidence for high-velocity low-amplitude (HVLA) spinal manipulation in the treatment for CR, this strategy has been frequently labeled as contraindicated. Scientific support for appropriate outcome measures for CR is equally deficient. While more scientific data is needed to draw firm conclusions, the present review suggests that spinal manipulation may be cautiously considered as a therapeutic option for patients suffering from CR. With respect to outcome measures, the Neck Disability Index appears well-suited for spinal manipulative treatment of CR.     

The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index demonstrates factor, construct and longitudinal validity

Background  

The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) is a self-report measure developed to evaluate patients with shoulder pathology. While some validation has been conducted, broader analyses are indicated. This study determined aspects of cross-sectional and longitudinal validity of the SPADI.     

Responsiveness of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) instruments in patients with spinal disorders

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Information System (PROMIS) instruments are an important advancement in the use of PROs, but need to be evaluated with longitudinal data to determine whether they are responsive to change in specific clinical populations.

Neck motion kinematics: an inter-tester reliability study using an interactive neck VR assessment in asymptomatic individuals

Background and Purpose

The use of virtual reality (VR) for assessment and intervention of neck pain has previously been used and shown reliable for cervical range of motion measures. Neck VR enables analysis of task-oriented neck movement by stimulating responsive movements to external stimuli. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to establish inter-tester reliability of neck kinematic measures so that it can be used as a reliable assessment and treatment tool between clinicians.

Methods

This reliability study included 46 asymptomatic participants, who were assessed using the neck VR system which displayed an interactive VR scenario via a head-mounted device, controlled by neck movements. The objective of the interactive assessment was to hit 16 targets, randomly appearing in four directions, as fast as possible. Each participant was tested twice by two different testers.

Results

Good reliability was found of neck motion kinematic measures in flexion, extension, and rotation (0.64–0.93 inter-class correlation). High reliability was shown for peak velocity globally (0.93), in left rotation (0.9), right rotation and extension (0.88), and flexion (0.86). Mean velocity had a good global reliability (0.84), except for left rotation directed movement with moderate reliability (0.68). Minimal detectable change for peak velocity ranged from 41 to 53 °/s, while mean velocity ranged from 20 to 25 °/s.

Conclusions

The results suggest high reliability for peak and mean velocity as measured by the interactive Neck VR assessment of neck motion kinematics. VR appears to provide a reliable and more ecologically valid method of cervical motion evaluation than previous conventional methodologies.

     

Responsiveness of the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index in patients with adhesive capsulitis

Background  

Instruments designed to measure the subjective impact of painful shoulder conditions have become essential in shoulder research. The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) is one of the most extensively used scales of this type. The objective of this study was to investigate reproducibility and responsiveness of the SPADI in patients with adhesive capsulitis.